Analysis of two questionnaires on quality of life of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2624.3148Keywords:
Quality of Life, Pulmonary Disease Chronic Obstructive, Lung Diseases, Obstructive, Hospital Care, Nursing Assessment, Lung DiseaseAbstract
Objective: to evaluate the efficacy of quality of life questionnaires St. George Respiratory Questionnaire and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease based on correlation and agreement analyses, and identify the most effective tool to assess their quality of life. Method: crosssectional cohort study with patients hospitalized in a Spanish hospital for exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Health-related quality of life was assessed with both questionnaires. The correlation and the agreement between the questionnaires were analyzed, as well as the internal consistency. Associations were established between the clinical variables and the results of the questionnaire. Results: one hundred and fifty-six patients participated in the study. The scales had a correlation and agreement between them and high internal consistency. A higher sensitivity of the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test was observed for the presence of cough and expectoration. Conclusion: the questionnaires have similar reliability and validity to measure the quality of life in patients with acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test is more sensitive to detect cough and expectoration and requires a shorter time to be completed.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.