Department of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
GRIAC Research Institute, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2017 Mar 28;27(1):20. doi: 10.1038/s41533-017-0023-0.
Three questionnaires are recommended in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by the global initiative for obstructive lung disease, of which two are the more comprehensive assessments: the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test and the clinical chronic obstructive pulmonary disease questionnaire. Both are carefully designed high-quality questionnaires, but information on the feasibility for routine use is scarce. The aim of this study was to compare the time to complete the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test and the clinical chronic obstructive pulmonary disease questionnaire and the acceptability of the questionnaires. Furthermore, the agreement between electronic and paper versions of the questionnaires was explored. The time to complete the electronic versions of the questionnaires was 99.6 [IQR 74; 157] vs. 97.5 [IQR 68; 136] seconds for clinical clinical chronic obstructive pulmonary disease questionnaire and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test, respectively. The difference in time to complete the questionnaire was not significant. The two questionnaires did not differ in "easiness to complete" or "importance of issues raised in questionnaires". Electronic vs. paper versions revealed high agreement (ICC CCQ = 0.815 [0.712; 0.883] and ICC CAT = 0.751 [0.608; 0.847]) between the administration methods. Based on this study it can be concluded that both questionnaires are equally suitable for use in routine clinical practice, because they are both quick to complete and have a good acceptability by the patient. Agreement between electronic and paper versions of the questionnaires was high, so use of electronic versions is justified.COPD: QUESTIONNAIRES EQUALLY SUITABLE FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Two questionnaires commonly used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD) are equally suitable for routine primary care. Researchers in The Netherlands, led by Janwillem Kocks from the University Medical Center Groningen, administered both the COPD assessment test (CAT) and the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ) to 95 patients with the lung disease. These two tests are the most comprehensive assessments recommended by the global initiative for obstructive lung disease for guiding treatment decisions. The researchers found that both tests took approximately 95-100 s on average. Both tests were also equally easy to complete and provided similar types of information. Most patients said they had no preference for either one, and they filled out both electronic and paper versions of the questionnaires in much the same way. The authors conclude that both tests seem fine for routine use.
三份问卷被全球阻塞性肺病倡议推荐用于慢性阻塞性肺疾病的管理,其中两份是更全面的评估问卷:慢性阻塞性肺疾病评估测试和临床慢性阻塞性肺疾病问卷。这两个问卷都经过精心设计,质量很高,但关于其常规使用可行性的信息却很少。本研究旨在比较完成慢性阻塞性肺疾病评估测试和临床慢性阻塞性肺疾病问卷所需的时间以及问卷的可接受性。此外,还探索了问卷电子版本和纸质版本之间的一致性。电子版本的问卷完成时间分别为 99.6 [IQR 74; 157] 秒和 97.5 [IQR 68; 136] 秒,分别为临床慢性阻塞性肺疾病问卷和慢性阻塞性肺疾病评估测试。完成问卷的时间差异无统计学意义。这两个问卷在“完成的容易程度”或“问卷中提出的问题的重要性”方面没有差异。电子版本与纸质版本之间显示出高度的一致性(ICC CCQ = 0.815 [0.712; 0.883] 和 ICC CAT = 0.751 [0.608; 0.847])。基于这项研究,可以得出结论,这两个问卷在常规临床实践中同样适用,因为它们都完成得很快,并且患者的接受度都很好。问卷的电子版本和纸质版本之间的一致性很高,因此使用电子版本是合理的。慢性阻塞性肺病:问卷同样适用于临床实践:两种常用于管理慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)的问卷在常规初级保健中同样适用。荷兰的研究人员,由格罗宁根大学医学中心的 Janwillem Kocks 领导,对 95 名患有这种肺部疾病的患者进行了 COPD 评估测试(CAT)和临床 COPD 问卷(CCQ)的测试。这两种测试是全球阻塞性肺病倡议推荐的最全面的评估方法,用于指导治疗决策。研究人员发现,两种测试的平均用时约为 95-100 秒。这两种测试也同样容易完成,并提供了类似类型的信息。大多数患者表示他们对两者都没有偏好,他们以几乎相同的方式填写了电子版本和纸质版本的问卷。作者得出结论,这两种测试似乎都适用于常规使用。