Evaluation of the Norwegian version of the Dyspnoea-12 questionnaire in patients with COPD.
COPD epidemiology
equipment evaluations
perception of asthma/breathlessness
psychology
respiratory measurement
Journal
BMJ open respiratory research
ISSN: 2052-4439
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open Respir Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101638061
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
29
03
2022
accepted:
30
04
2022
entrez:
24
5
2022
pubmed:
25
5
2022
medline:
27
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Dyspnoea-12 (D-12) questionnaire is widely used and tested in patients with breathing difficulties. The objective of this study was to translate and undertake the first evaluation of the measurement properties of the Norwegian version of the D-12 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) attending a 4-week inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess structural validity. Fit to the Rasch partial credit model and differential item functioning (DIF) were assessed in relation to age, sex and comorbidity. Based on a priori hypotheses, validity was assessed through comparisons with scores for the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) and clinical variables. There were 203 (86%) respondents with a mean age (SD) of 65.2 (9.0) years, and 49% were female. The D-12 showed satisfactory structural validity including presence of physical and affective domains. There was acceptable fit to Rasch model including unidimensionality for the two domains, and no evidence of DIF. Correlations with scores for the CAT, HADS and clinical variables were as hypothesised and highest for domains assessing similar aspects of health. The Norwegian version of the D-12 showed good evidence for validity and internal consistency in this group of patients with COPD, including support for two separate domains. Further testing for these measurement properties is recommended in other Norwegian patients with dyspnoea.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Dyspnoea-12 (D-12) questionnaire is widely used and tested in patients with breathing difficulties. The objective of this study was to translate and undertake the first evaluation of the measurement properties of the Norwegian version of the D-12 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) attending a 4-week inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programme.
METHODS
Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess structural validity. Fit to the Rasch partial credit model and differential item functioning (DIF) were assessed in relation to age, sex and comorbidity. Based on a priori hypotheses, validity was assessed through comparisons with scores for the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) and clinical variables.
RESULTS
There were 203 (86%) respondents with a mean age (SD) of 65.2 (9.0) years, and 49% were female. The D-12 showed satisfactory structural validity including presence of physical and affective domains. There was acceptable fit to Rasch model including unidimensionality for the two domains, and no evidence of DIF. Correlations with scores for the CAT, HADS and clinical variables were as hypothesised and highest for domains assessing similar aspects of health.
CONCLUSIONS
The Norwegian version of the D-12 showed good evidence for validity and internal consistency in this group of patients with COPD, including support for two separate domains. Further testing for these measurement properties is recommended in other Norwegian patients with dyspnoea.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35609940
pii: 9/1/e001262
doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2022-001262
pmc: PMC9131054
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Eur Respir J. 2014 Dec;44(6):1428-46
pubmed: 25359355
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 Feb 15;185(4):435-52
pubmed: 22336677
Qual Life Res. 2007;16 Suppl 1:33-42
pubmed: 17443420
Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104
pubmed: 15804318
Thorax. 2010 Jan;65(1):21-6
pubmed: 19996336
J Asthma. 2011 Aug;48(6):602-8
pubmed: 21635136
Chest. 2016 Feb;149(2):413-425
pubmed: 26513112
PLoS One. 2019 Apr 9;14(4):e0215073
pubmed: 30964935
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 Feb;53(2):208-215
pubmed: 27720789
Qual Life Res. 2018 May;27(5):1147-1157
pubmed: 29435801
Scand J Caring Sci. 2014 Jun;28(2):413-20
pubmed: 23713548
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 May;95(20):e3672
pubmed: 27196472
Respir Med. 2010 Sep;104(9):1350-5
pubmed: 20471238
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2019 Sep 18;6(1):e000418
pubmed: 31673362
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Jan;63(1):e46-e58
pubmed: 34358643
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;14(5):377-81
pubmed: 7154893
Eur Respir J. 2015 Jun;45(6):1681-91
pubmed: 25792641
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Oct;102:23-37
pubmed: 29793009
Eur Respir J. 2014 Jun;43(6):1750-62
pubmed: 24525437
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361-70
pubmed: 6880820
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Jan;63(1):e75-e87
pubmed: 34273524
Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2012 Jun;72(6):467-74
pubmed: 23101012
N Engl J Med. 2004 Mar 4;350(10):1005-12
pubmed: 14999112
Appl Psychol Meas. 2017 May;41(3):178-194
pubmed: 29881087
Eur Respir J Suppl. 1993 Mar;16:5-40
pubmed: 8499054
Eur Respir J. 2014 Jun;43(6):1610-20
pubmed: 24176991
Respir Med. 2007 Mar;101(3):399-410
pubmed: 16914301
Respirology. 2017 Feb;22(2):251-262
pubmed: 28102972
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2020 Feb 21;30(1):6
pubmed: 32081967