Department of Medicine, Section of General Internal Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Department of Pediatrics, Section of Academic Pediatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Pediatr Pulmonol. 2023 May;58(5):1322-1336. doi: 10.1002/ppul.26342. Epub 2023 Feb 8.
We examined the validity of the Childhood Asthma Control Test (C-ACT) and identified recommended thresholds for uncontrolled asthma in children from varying backgrounds.
A systematic literature review was performed utilizing PubMed, Ovid Medline, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and conference proceedings. Studies were included if they enrolled children, had a primary outcome of asthma control, examined test validity or psychometrics, and utilized the C-ACT. Along with study design and demographic data, we extracted all outcomes and comparisons used to validate the C-ACT. We evaluated risk of bias using the COSMIN Risk of Bias tool. Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020211119).
Of 4924 records screened, 28 studies were included. Studies were conducted internationally and published between 2007 and 2018. Average number of enrolled participants was 193 (SD = 155, range = 22-671). Ten studies calculated Cronbach's α (mean [SD] = 0.78(0.05), range = 0.677-0.83). Thirteen studies recommended cut-offs for uncontrolled asthma (≤18-≤24). Nine studies found significant agreement or correlation between C-ACT and Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines/physician assessment of asthma control (correlation coefficients range = 0.219-0.65). Correlation coefficients between C-ACT and spirometry were <0.6 in five of six studies that included spirometry. Kappa values for C-ACT and various spirometry measurements ranged 0.00-0.34.
The C-ACT showed good internal consistency and mixed levels of agreement and correlation with various clinical asthma measures. Recommended cut-offs for asthma control varied and had no consistent relationship with nationality, race, ethnicity, or language. Few studies examined cross-cultural validity and multiple populations remain under-studied.
我们检验了儿童哮喘控制测试(C-ACT)的有效性,并确定了来自不同背景的儿童中未控制哮喘的推荐阈值。
利用 PubMed、Ovid Medline、SCOPUS、CINAHL 和会议记录进行了系统文献回顾。如果研究纳入了儿童,主要结局为哮喘控制,检验了测试的有效性或心理测量学,并使用了 C-ACT,则将其纳入研究。除了研究设计和人口统计学数据外,我们还提取了用于验证 C-ACT 的所有结果和比较。我们使用 COSMIN 偏倚风险工具评估了偏倚风险。我们的方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42020211119)中注册。
在筛选出的 4924 条记录中,有 28 项研究被纳入。这些研究在国际上进行,发表于 2007 年至 2018 年之间。纳入研究的平均参与者人数为 193 人(标准差[SD] = 155,范围 22-671)。有 10 项研究计算了 Cronbach's α(平均值[SD] = 0.78(0.05),范围 0.677-0.83)。有 13 项研究建议了未控制哮喘的截断值(≤18-≤24)。有 9 项研究发现 C-ACT 与全球哮喘倡议/医生评估哮喘控制之间存在显著的一致性或相关性(相关系数范围为 0.219-0.65)。在纳入了肺功能检查的 6 项研究中有 5 项中,C-ACT 与肺功能检查之间的相关系数<0.6。C-ACT 与各种肺功能检查测量值之间的 Kappa 值为 0.00-0.34。
C-ACT 显示出良好的内部一致性和与各种临床哮喘测量方法的混合水平的一致性和相关性。建议的哮喘控制截断值因国籍、种族、民族或语言而异,且无一致性关系。很少有研究检验了跨文化有效性,而且还有多个人群未得到充分研究。