Development and validation of a novel questionnaire to describe and assess sensations and triggers associated with refractory and unexplained chronic cough.
Shannon Galgani, Chelsea Sawyer, Jenny King, Rachel Dockry, James Wingfield-Digby, Kimberly Holt, Joanne Mitchell, Shilpi Sen, Danielle Birchall, Francesca Solari, Jacky Smith, Janelle Yorke
{"title":"Development and validation of a novel questionnaire to describe and assess sensations and triggers associated with refractory and unexplained chronic cough.","authors":"Shannon Galgani, Chelsea Sawyer, Jenny King, Rachel Dockry, James Wingfield-Digby, Kimberly Holt, Joanne Mitchell, Shilpi Sen, Danielle Birchall, Francesca Solari, Jacky Smith, Janelle Yorke","doi":"10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Refractory or unexplained chronic cough (RUCC) is a common clinical problem with no effective diagnostic tools. The Sensations and Triggers Provoking Cough questionnaire (TOPIC) was developed to characterise cough in RUCC versus cough in other conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Content analysis of participant interviews discussing the sensations and triggers of chronic cough informed TOPIC development. Participants with chronic cough completed the draft-TOPIC (a subset repeating 5-7 days later), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Cough Severity Diary (CSD) and Global Rating of Change Scale. The draft-TOPIC item list was reduced in hierarchical and Rasch analysis to refine the questionnaire to the TOPIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>49 items describing the triggers and sensations of cough were generated from participant interviews (RUCC n=14, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) n=11, interstitial lung disease (ILD) n=10, asthma n=11, bronchiectasis n=3, cystic fibrosis n=7). 140 participants (median age 60.0 (19.0-88.0), female 56.4%; RUCC n=39, ILD n=38, asthma n=45, COPD n=6, bronchiectasis n=12) completed draft-TOPIC, where items with poor 'fit' for RUCC were removed to create TOPIC (8 trigger items, 7 sensation items). Median TOPIC score was significantly higher in RUCC (37.0) vs ILD (24.5, p=0.009) and asthma (7.0, p<0.001), but not bronchiectasis (20.0, p=0.318) or COPD (18.5, p=0.238), likely due to small sample sizes. The Rasch model demonstrated excellent fit in RUCC (χ<sup>2</sup>=22.04, p=0.85; PSI=0.88); as expected. When all participant groups were included, fit was no longer demonstrated (χ<sup>2</sup>=66.43, p=0.0001, PSI=0.89) due to the increased heterogeneity (CI=0.077). TOPIC correlated positively with SGRQ (r=0.47, p<0.001) and CSD (r=0.63, p<0.001). The test-retest reliability of TOPIC (intraclass correlation coefficient) was excellent (r=0.90, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High TOPIC scores in the RUCC patients suggest their cough is characterised by specific sensations and triggers. Validation of TOPIC in cough clinics may demonstrate value as an aid to identify features of RUCC versus cough in other conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9048,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331982/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002430","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Refractory or unexplained chronic cough (RUCC) is a common clinical problem with no effective diagnostic tools. The Sensations and Triggers Provoking Cough questionnaire (TOPIC) was developed to characterise cough in RUCC versus cough in other conditions.
Methods: Content analysis of participant interviews discussing the sensations and triggers of chronic cough informed TOPIC development. Participants with chronic cough completed the draft-TOPIC (a subset repeating 5-7 days later), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Cough Severity Diary (CSD) and Global Rating of Change Scale. The draft-TOPIC item list was reduced in hierarchical and Rasch analysis to refine the questionnaire to the TOPIC.
Results: 49 items describing the triggers and sensations of cough were generated from participant interviews (RUCC n=14, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) n=11, interstitial lung disease (ILD) n=10, asthma n=11, bronchiectasis n=3, cystic fibrosis n=7). 140 participants (median age 60.0 (19.0-88.0), female 56.4%; RUCC n=39, ILD n=38, asthma n=45, COPD n=6, bronchiectasis n=12) completed draft-TOPIC, where items with poor 'fit' for RUCC were removed to create TOPIC (8 trigger items, 7 sensation items). Median TOPIC score was significantly higher in RUCC (37.0) vs ILD (24.5, p=0.009) and asthma (7.0, p<0.001), but not bronchiectasis (20.0, p=0.318) or COPD (18.5, p=0.238), likely due to small sample sizes. The Rasch model demonstrated excellent fit in RUCC (χ2=22.04, p=0.85; PSI=0.88); as expected. When all participant groups were included, fit was no longer demonstrated (χ2=66.43, p=0.0001, PSI=0.89) due to the increased heterogeneity (CI=0.077). TOPIC correlated positively with SGRQ (r=0.47, p<0.001) and CSD (r=0.63, p<0.001). The test-retest reliability of TOPIC (intraclass correlation coefficient) was excellent (r=0.90, p<0.001).
Conclusions: High TOPIC scores in the RUCC patients suggest their cough is characterised by specific sensations and triggers. Validation of TOPIC in cough clinics may demonstrate value as an aid to identify features of RUCC versus cough in other conditions.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Open Respiratory Research is a peer-reviewed, open access journal publishing respiratory and critical care medicine. It is the sister journal to Thorax and co-owned by the British Thoracic Society and BMJ. The journal focuses on robustness of methodology and scientific rigour with less emphasis on novelty or perceived impact. BMJ Open Respiratory Research operates a rapid review process, with continuous publication online, ensuring timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal publishes review articles and all research study types: Basic science including laboratory based experiments and animal models, Pilot studies or proof of concept, Observational studies, Study protocols, Registries, Clinical trials from phase I to multicentre randomised clinical trials, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.