Cargando…

The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication

BACKGROUND: The screening and diagnosis of intermittent claudication is a challenging process and often relies on the expertise of specialist vascular clinicians. We sought to investigate the diagnostic performance of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) as a screening tool for referrals o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ibeggazene, Saïd, Stirrup, Andrew, Pymer, Sean, Palmer, Joanne, Cai, Paris L, Smith, George E, Chetter, Ian C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9936437/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143731
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17085381211059665
_version_ 1784890229390311424
author Ibeggazene, Saïd
Stirrup, Andrew
Pymer, Sean
Palmer, Joanne
Cai, Paris L
Smith, George E
Chetter, Ian C
author_facet Ibeggazene, Saïd
Stirrup, Andrew
Pymer, Sean
Palmer, Joanne
Cai, Paris L
Smith, George E
Chetter, Ian C
author_sort Ibeggazene, Saïd
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The screening and diagnosis of intermittent claudication is a challenging process and often relies on the expertise of specialist vascular clinicians. We sought to investigate the diagnostic performance of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) as a screening tool for referrals of suspected intermittent claudication from primary to secondary care. METHOD: Prospectively, 100 referrals from primary care with a stated diagnosis or query regarding intermittent claudication were recruited. All participants who completed the ECQ, underwent an anklebrachial pressure index (ABPI) assessment and treadmill exercise testing. Outcomes of the ECQ were compared to clinical diagnoses of intermittent claudication. RESULTS: The ECQ had a sensitivity of 46.8% (95% CI: 27–65%), specificity of 63.2% (95% CI: 43–82%) and accuracy of 53.0% (95% CI: 43–63%). The diagnostic performance was not changed by combining the ECQ with a positive ABPI or post-exercise ABPI outcome for PAD. CONCLUSION: The ECQ had a poor diagnostic performance in this cohort. Considering the results found here and in other recent studies, the utility of the ECQ as a screening tool and epidemiological survey tool must be questioned. Novel, low-resource diagnostic tools are needed in this population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9936437
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99364372023-02-18 The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication Ibeggazene, Saïd Stirrup, Andrew Pymer, Sean Palmer, Joanne Cai, Paris L Smith, George E Chetter, Ian C Vascular Original Articles BACKGROUND: The screening and diagnosis of intermittent claudication is a challenging process and often relies on the expertise of specialist vascular clinicians. We sought to investigate the diagnostic performance of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) as a screening tool for referrals of suspected intermittent claudication from primary to secondary care. METHOD: Prospectively, 100 referrals from primary care with a stated diagnosis or query regarding intermittent claudication were recruited. All participants who completed the ECQ, underwent an anklebrachial pressure index (ABPI) assessment and treadmill exercise testing. Outcomes of the ECQ were compared to clinical diagnoses of intermittent claudication. RESULTS: The ECQ had a sensitivity of 46.8% (95% CI: 27–65%), specificity of 63.2% (95% CI: 43–82%) and accuracy of 53.0% (95% CI: 43–63%). The diagnostic performance was not changed by combining the ECQ with a positive ABPI or post-exercise ABPI outcome for PAD. CONCLUSION: The ECQ had a poor diagnostic performance in this cohort. Considering the results found here and in other recent studies, the utility of the ECQ as a screening tool and epidemiological survey tool must be questioned. Novel, low-resource diagnostic tools are needed in this population. SAGE Publications 2022-02-10 2023-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9936437/ /pubmed/35143731 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17085381211059665 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Ibeggazene, Saïd
Stirrup, Andrew
Pymer, Sean
Palmer, Joanne
Cai, Paris L
Smith, George E
Chetter, Ian C
The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title_full The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title_fullStr The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title_full_unstemmed The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title_short The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
title_sort edinburgh claudication questionnaire has poor diagnostic accuracy in people with intermittent claudication
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9936437/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143731
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17085381211059665
work_keys_str_mv AT ibeggazenesaid theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT stirrupandrew theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT pymersean theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT palmerjoanne theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT caiparisl theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT smithgeorgee theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT chetterianc theedinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT ibeggazenesaid edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT stirrupandrew edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT pymersean edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT palmerjoanne edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT caiparisl edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT smithgeorgee edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication
AT chetterianc edinburghclaudicationquestionnairehaspoordiagnosticaccuracyinpeoplewithintermittentclaudication