Cargando…

Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history

PURPOSE: The Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ) was developed and validated as a case-finding tool to identify patients at risk of airflow obstruction (AO) that should be evaluated further using spirometry. Our objective was to assess the usability and validity of additional questionnaire-administrat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dalal, Anand A, DeMuro-Mercon, Carla, Lewis, Sandy, Nelson, Lauren, Gilligan, Theresa, McLeod, Lori
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3008328/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191437
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S13900
_version_ 1782194520801148928
author Dalal, Anand A
DeMuro-Mercon, Carla
Lewis, Sandy
Nelson, Lauren
Gilligan, Theresa
McLeod, Lori
author_facet Dalal, Anand A
DeMuro-Mercon, Carla
Lewis, Sandy
Nelson, Lauren
Gilligan, Theresa
McLeod, Lori
author_sort Dalal, Anand A
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ) was developed and validated as a case-finding tool to identify patients at risk of airflow obstruction (AO) that should be evaluated further using spirometry. Our objective was to assess the usability and validity of additional questionnaire-administration modes, including Web-based, interactive voice response system (IVRS)-based, and interviewer-based modes. DESIGN: This multicenter, prospective, noninterventional data-collection study enrolled 149 individuals aged ≥40 years with current or former smoking history. A two-visit crossover design was employed; patients completed the paper-based LFQ and were randomly assigned to complete one of three alternate modes. METHODS: Statistical evaluation included item-level, scale-level, and AO risk-classification comparisons; a satisfaction survey assessed patient preference. RESULTS: This study showed a great degree of concordance between alternate forms of the LFQ and the paper version. Results indicated an absence of floor and ceiling effects and the average LFQ item-level means were consistent across modes. LFQ scores were stable between assessments, (administered approximately one week apart) showed exceptionally good agreement, and AO risk classification using the LFQ cut point was consistent across modes. CONCLUSIONS: The LFQ is an important case-finding tool to aid primary care physicians in further evaluating symptomatic patients at risk of AO. The alternate modes will further facilitate the implementation and widespread uptake of this tool.
format Text
id pubmed-3008328
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30083282010-12-29 Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history Dalal, Anand A DeMuro-Mercon, Carla Lewis, Sandy Nelson, Lauren Gilligan, Theresa McLeod, Lori Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Original Research PURPOSE: The Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ) was developed and validated as a case-finding tool to identify patients at risk of airflow obstruction (AO) that should be evaluated further using spirometry. Our objective was to assess the usability and validity of additional questionnaire-administration modes, including Web-based, interactive voice response system (IVRS)-based, and interviewer-based modes. DESIGN: This multicenter, prospective, noninterventional data-collection study enrolled 149 individuals aged ≥40 years with current or former smoking history. A two-visit crossover design was employed; patients completed the paper-based LFQ and were randomly assigned to complete one of three alternate modes. METHODS: Statistical evaluation included item-level, scale-level, and AO risk-classification comparisons; a satisfaction survey assessed patient preference. RESULTS: This study showed a great degree of concordance between alternate forms of the LFQ and the paper version. Results indicated an absence of floor and ceiling effects and the average LFQ item-level means were consistent across modes. LFQ scores were stable between assessments, (administered approximately one week apart) showed exceptionally good agreement, and AO risk classification using the LFQ cut point was consistent across modes. CONCLUSIONS: The LFQ is an important case-finding tool to aid primary care physicians in further evaluating symptomatic patients at risk of AO. The alternate modes will further facilitate the implementation and widespread uptake of this tool. Dove Medical Press 2010 2010-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3008328/ /pubmed/21191437 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S13900 Text en © 2010 Dalal et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Dalal, Anand A
DeMuro-Mercon, Carla
Lewis, Sandy
Nelson, Lauren
Gilligan, Theresa
McLeod, Lori
Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title_full Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title_fullStr Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title_full_unstemmed Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title_short Validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (LFQ) in subjects with smoking history
title_sort validation of alternate modes of administration of the lung function questionnaire (lfq) in subjects with smoking history
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3008328/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191437
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S13900
work_keys_str_mv AT dalalananda validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory
AT demuromerconcarla validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory
AT lewissandy validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory
AT nelsonlauren validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory
AT gilligantheresa validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory
AT mcleodlori validationofalternatemodesofadministrationofthelungfunctionquestionnairelfqinsubjectswithsmokinghistory