Cargando…
Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference
BACKGROUND: In the GOLD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) strategy document, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scale are recommended for the assessment of symptoms using the cutoff points of CCQ ≥1, C...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27274226 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S99793 |
_version_ | 1782433294782038016 |
---|---|
author | Tsiligianni, Ioanna G Alma, Harma J de Jong, Corina Jelusic, Danijel Wittmann, Michael Schuler, Michael Schultz, Konrad Kollen, Boudewijn J van der Molen, Thys Kocks, Janwillem WH |
author_facet | Tsiligianni, Ioanna G Alma, Harma J de Jong, Corina Jelusic, Danijel Wittmann, Michael Schuler, Michael Schultz, Konrad Kollen, Boudewijn J van der Molen, Thys Kocks, Janwillem WH |
author_sort | Tsiligianni, Ioanna G |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the GOLD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) strategy document, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scale are recommended for the assessment of symptoms using the cutoff points of CCQ ≥1, CAT ≥10, and mMRC scale ≥2 to indicate symptomatic patients. The current study investigates the criterion validity of the CCQ, CAT and mMRC scale based on a reference cutoff point of St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) ≥25, as suggested by GOLD, following sensitivity and specificity analysis. In addition, areas under the curve (AUCs) of the CCQ, CAT, and mMRC scale were compared using two SGRQ cutoff points (≥25 and ≥20). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two data sets were used: study A, 238 patients from a pulmonary rehabilitation program; and study B, 101 patients from primary care. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the correspondence between the recommended cutoff points of the questionnaires. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and AUC scores for cutoff point SGRQ ≥25 were: study A, 0.99, 0.43, and 0.96 for CCQ ≥1, 0.92, 0.48, and 0.89 for CAT ≥10, and 0.68, 0.91, and 0.91 for mMRC ≥2; study B, 0.87, 0.77, and 0.9 for CCQ ≥1, 0.76, 0.73, and 0.82 for CAT ≥10, and 0.21, 1, and 0.81 for mMRC ≥2. Sensitivity, specificity, and AUC scores for cutoff point SGRQ ≥20 were: study A, 0.99, 0.73, and 0.99 for CCQ ≥1, 0.91, 0.73, and 0.94 for CAT ≥10, and 0.66, 0.95, and 0.94 for mMRC ≥2; study B, 0.8, 0.89, and 0.89 for CCQ ≥1, 0.69, 0.78, and 0.8 for CAT ≥10, and 0.18, 1, and 0.81 for mMRC ≥2. CONCLUSION: Based on data from these two different samples, this study showed that the suggested cutoff point for the SGRQ (≥25) did not seem to correspond well with the established cutoff points of the CCQ or CAT scales, resulting in low specificity levels. The correspondence with the mMRC scale seemed satisfactory, though not optimal. The SGRQ threshold of ≥20 corresponded slightly better than SGRQ ≥25, recently suggested by GOLD 2015, with the established cutoff points for the CCQ, CAT, and mMRC scale. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4876797 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48767972016-06-07 Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference Tsiligianni, Ioanna G Alma, Harma J de Jong, Corina Jelusic, Danijel Wittmann, Michael Schuler, Michael Schultz, Konrad Kollen, Boudewijn J van der Molen, Thys Kocks, Janwillem WH Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Original Research BACKGROUND: In the GOLD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) strategy document, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) scale are recommended for the assessment of symptoms using the cutoff points of CCQ ≥1, CAT ≥10, and mMRC scale ≥2 to indicate symptomatic patients. The current study investigates the criterion validity of the CCQ, CAT and mMRC scale based on a reference cutoff point of St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) ≥25, as suggested by GOLD, following sensitivity and specificity analysis. In addition, areas under the curve (AUCs) of the CCQ, CAT, and mMRC scale were compared using two SGRQ cutoff points (≥25 and ≥20). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two data sets were used: study A, 238 patients from a pulmonary rehabilitation program; and study B, 101 patients from primary care. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the correspondence between the recommended cutoff points of the questionnaires. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and AUC scores for cutoff point SGRQ ≥25 were: study A, 0.99, 0.43, and 0.96 for CCQ ≥1, 0.92, 0.48, and 0.89 for CAT ≥10, and 0.68, 0.91, and 0.91 for mMRC ≥2; study B, 0.87, 0.77, and 0.9 for CCQ ≥1, 0.76, 0.73, and 0.82 for CAT ≥10, and 0.21, 1, and 0.81 for mMRC ≥2. Sensitivity, specificity, and AUC scores for cutoff point SGRQ ≥20 were: study A, 0.99, 0.73, and 0.99 for CCQ ≥1, 0.91, 0.73, and 0.94 for CAT ≥10, and 0.66, 0.95, and 0.94 for mMRC ≥2; study B, 0.8, 0.89, and 0.89 for CCQ ≥1, 0.69, 0.78, and 0.8 for CAT ≥10, and 0.18, 1, and 0.81 for mMRC ≥2. CONCLUSION: Based on data from these two different samples, this study showed that the suggested cutoff point for the SGRQ (≥25) did not seem to correspond well with the established cutoff points of the CCQ or CAT scales, resulting in low specificity levels. The correspondence with the mMRC scale seemed satisfactory, though not optimal. The SGRQ threshold of ≥20 corresponded slightly better than SGRQ ≥25, recently suggested by GOLD 2015, with the established cutoff points for the CCQ, CAT, and mMRC scale. Dove Medical Press 2016-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4876797/ /pubmed/27274226 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S99793 Text en © 2016 Tsiligianni et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Tsiligianni, Ioanna G Alma, Harma J de Jong, Corina Jelusic, Danijel Wittmann, Michael Schuler, Michael Schultz, Konrad Kollen, Boudewijn J van der Molen, Thys Kocks, Janwillem WH Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title | Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title_full | Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title_fullStr | Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title_full_unstemmed | Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title_short | Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
title_sort | investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the clinical copd questionnaire, copd assessment test, and modified medical research council scale according to gold using st george’s respiratory questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27274226 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S99793 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tsiligianniioannag investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT almaharmaj investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT dejongcorina investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT jelusicdanijel investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT wittmannmichael investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT schulermichael investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT schultzkonrad investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT kollenboudewijnj investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT vandermolenthys investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference AT kocksjanwillemwh investigatingsensitivityspecificityandareaunderthecurveoftheclinicalcopdquestionnairecopdassessmenttestandmodifiedmedicalresearchcouncilscaleaccordingtogoldusingstgeorgesrespiratoryquestionnairecutoff25and20asreference |