Cargando…

Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies

BACKGROUND: Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is important in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite the high prevalence of COPD in Germany, Switzerland and Austria there is no validated disease-specific instrument available. The objective of this study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Puhan, Milo A, Behnke, Michaela, Frey, Martin, Grueter, Thomas, Brandli, Otto, Lichtenschopf, Alfred, Guyatt, Gordon H, Schunemann, Holger J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2004
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC333432/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14713317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-1
_version_ 1782121212941434880
author Puhan, Milo A
Behnke, Michaela
Frey, Martin
Grueter, Thomas
Brandli, Otto
Lichtenschopf, Alfred
Guyatt, Gordon H
Schunemann, Holger J
author_facet Puhan, Milo A
Behnke, Michaela
Frey, Martin
Grueter, Thomas
Brandli, Otto
Lichtenschopf, Alfred
Guyatt, Gordon H
Schunemann, Holger J
author_sort Puhan, Milo A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is important in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite the high prevalence of COPD in Germany, Switzerland and Austria there is no validated disease-specific instrument available. The objective of this study was to translate the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ), one of the most widely used respiratory HRQL questionnaires, into German, develop an interviewer- and self-administered version including both standardised and individualised dyspnoea questions, and validate these versions in two randomised studies. METHODS: We recruited three groups of patients with COPD in Switzerland, Germany and Austria. The 44 patients of the first group completed the CRQ during pilot testing to adapt the CRQ to German-speaking patients. We then recruited 80 patients participating in pulmonary rehabilitation programs to assess internal consistency reliability and cross-sectional validity of the CRQ. The third group consisted of 38 patients with stable COPD without an intervention to assess test-retest reliability. To compare the interviewer- and self-administered versions, we randomised patients in groups 2 and 3 to the interviewer- or self-administered CRQ. Patients completed both the standardised and individualised dyspnoea questions. RESULTS: For both administration formats and all domains, we found good internal consistency reliability (Crohnbach's alpha between 0.73 and 0.89). Cross-sectional validity tended to be better for the standardised compared to the individualised dyspnoea questions and cross-sectional validity was slightly better for the self-administered format. Test-retest reliability was good for both the interviewer-administered CRQ (intraclass correlation coefficients for different domains between 0.81 and 0.95) and the self-administered format (intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.78 and 0.86). Lower within-person variability was responsible for the higher test-retest reliability of the interviewer-administered format while between person variability was similar for both formats. CONCLUSIONS: Investigators in German-speaking countries can choose between valid and reliable self-and interviewer-administered CRQ formats.
format Text
id pubmed-333432
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2004
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-3334322004-02-08 Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies Puhan, Milo A Behnke, Michaela Frey, Martin Grueter, Thomas Brandli, Otto Lichtenschopf, Alfred Guyatt, Gordon H Schunemann, Holger J Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is important in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite the high prevalence of COPD in Germany, Switzerland and Austria there is no validated disease-specific instrument available. The objective of this study was to translate the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ), one of the most widely used respiratory HRQL questionnaires, into German, develop an interviewer- and self-administered version including both standardised and individualised dyspnoea questions, and validate these versions in two randomised studies. METHODS: We recruited three groups of patients with COPD in Switzerland, Germany and Austria. The 44 patients of the first group completed the CRQ during pilot testing to adapt the CRQ to German-speaking patients. We then recruited 80 patients participating in pulmonary rehabilitation programs to assess internal consistency reliability and cross-sectional validity of the CRQ. The third group consisted of 38 patients with stable COPD without an intervention to assess test-retest reliability. To compare the interviewer- and self-administered versions, we randomised patients in groups 2 and 3 to the interviewer- or self-administered CRQ. Patients completed both the standardised and individualised dyspnoea questions. RESULTS: For both administration formats and all domains, we found good internal consistency reliability (Crohnbach's alpha between 0.73 and 0.89). Cross-sectional validity tended to be better for the standardised compared to the individualised dyspnoea questions and cross-sectional validity was slightly better for the self-administered format. Test-retest reliability was good for both the interviewer-administered CRQ (intraclass correlation coefficients for different domains between 0.81 and 0.95) and the self-administered format (intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.78 and 0.86). Lower within-person variability was responsible for the higher test-retest reliability of the interviewer-administered format while between person variability was similar for both formats. CONCLUSIONS: Investigators in German-speaking countries can choose between valid and reliable self-and interviewer-administered CRQ formats. BioMed Central 2004-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC333432/ /pubmed/14713317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-1 Text en Copyright © 2004 Puhan et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
spellingShingle Research
Puhan, Milo A
Behnke, Michaela
Frey, Martin
Grueter, Thomas
Brandli, Otto
Lichtenschopf, Alfred
Guyatt, Gordon H
Schunemann, Holger J
Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title_full Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title_fullStr Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title_full_unstemmed Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title_short Self-administration and interviewer-administration of the German Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
title_sort self-administration and interviewer-administration of the german chronic respiratory questionnaire: instrument development and assessment of validity and reliability in two randomised studies
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC333432/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14713317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-1
work_keys_str_mv AT puhanmiloa selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT behnkemichaela selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT freymartin selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT grueterthomas selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT brandliotto selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT lichtenschopfalfred selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT guyattgordonh selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies
AT schunemannholgerj selfadministrationandintervieweradministrationofthegermanchronicrespiratoryquestionnaireinstrumentdevelopmentandassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityintworandomisedstudies