The McMaster Cough Severity Questionnaire (MCSQ): a cough severity instrument for patients with refractory chronic cough.

IF 16.6 1区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM European Respiratory Journal Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1183/13993003.01565-2024
Elena Kum, Gordon H Guyatt, Rayid Abdulqawi, Peter Dicpinigaitis, Lieven Dupont, Stephen K Field, Cynthia L French, Peter G Gibson, Richard S Irwin, Faye Johnston, Lorcan McGarvey, Robert Newman, Nada Popovic, Jaclyn A Smith, Woo-Jung Song, Paul M O'Byrne, Imran Satia
{"title":"The McMaster Cough Severity Questionnaire (MCSQ): a cough severity instrument for patients with refractory chronic cough.","authors":"Elena Kum, Gordon H Guyatt, Rayid Abdulqawi, Peter Dicpinigaitis, Lieven Dupont, Stephen K Field, Cynthia L French, Peter G Gibson, Richard S Irwin, Faye Johnston, Lorcan McGarvey, Robert Newman, Nada Popovic, Jaclyn A Smith, Woo-Jung Song, Paul M O'Byrne, Imran Satia","doi":"10.1183/13993003.01565-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cough severity represents an important endpoint to assess the impact of therapies for patients with refractory chronic cough (RCC).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop a new patient-reported outcome measure addressing cough severity in patients with RCC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Phase 1 (item generation): A systematic survey, focus groups, and expert consultation generated 51 items. Phase 2 (item reduction): From a list of 51 items, 100 patients identified those they had experienced in the previous year and rated their importance on a 5-point scale. The MCSQ included items reported to occur most frequently and that had the highest importance scores. Patient feedback on the MCSQ led to elimination of redundant items. Another 100 patients completed the MCSQ, from which we performed an exploratory factor analysis and a Rasch analysis to further refine items on the MCSQ.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Phase 2 led to selection of 15 items from the initial 51. Patient feedback on the 15 items led to elimination of 5 redundant items. An exploratory factor analysis of the 10-item MCSQ led to selection of two domains, elimination of one item that demonstrated cross-loading, and another that had high inter-item correlations. A Rasch analysis of the 8-item MCSQ confirmed that the response options functioned in a logically progressive manner and that no items exhibited differential item functioning. The final 8-item MCSQ has a one-week recall period and includes two domains (intensity and frequency). The 8-item MCSQ had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, 0.89), proved able to distinguish different levels of cough severity (Pearson separation index, 0.89), and demonstrated high cross-sectional convergent validity (Pearson's correlation, 0.76 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.83]) with the 100-mm cough severity visual analogue scale.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Initial evidence supports the validity of the MCSQ, an 8-item instrument measuring cough severity in patients with RCC. Future studies should evaluate its properties in measuring change over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":12265,"journal":{"name":"European Respiratory Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":16.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Respiratory Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01565-2024","RegionNum":1,"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

Background: Cough severity represents an important endpoint to assess the impact of therapies for patients with refractory chronic cough (RCC).

Objective: To develop a new patient-reported outcome measure addressing cough severity in patients with RCC.

Methods: Phase 1 (item generation): A systematic survey, focus groups, and expert consultation generated 51 items. Phase 2 (item reduction): From a list of 51 items, 100 patients identified those they had experienced in the previous year and rated their importance on a 5-point scale. The MCSQ included items reported to occur most frequently and that had the highest importance scores. Patient feedback on the MCSQ led to elimination of redundant items. Another 100 patients completed the MCSQ, from which we performed an exploratory factor analysis and a Rasch analysis to further refine items on the MCSQ.

Results: Phase 2 led to selection of 15 items from the initial 51. Patient feedback on the 15 items led to elimination of 5 redundant items. An exploratory factor analysis of the 10-item MCSQ led to selection of two domains, elimination of one item that demonstrated cross-loading, and another that had high inter-item correlations. A Rasch analysis of the 8-item MCSQ confirmed that the response options functioned in a logically progressive manner and that no items exhibited differential item functioning. The final 8-item MCSQ has a one-week recall period and includes two domains (intensity and frequency). The 8-item MCSQ had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, 0.89), proved able to distinguish different levels of cough severity (Pearson separation index, 0.89), and demonstrated high cross-sectional convergent validity (Pearson's correlation, 0.76 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.83]) with the 100-mm cough severity visual analogue scale.

Conclusion: Initial evidence supports the validity of the MCSQ, an 8-item instrument measuring cough severity in patients with RCC. Future studies should evaluate its properties in measuring change over time.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
麦克马斯特咳嗽严重程度问卷(MCSQ):针对难治性慢性咳嗽患者的咳嗽严重程度工具。
背景:咳嗽严重程度是评估难治性慢性咳嗽(RCC)患者治疗效果的一个重要终点:咳嗽严重程度是评估难治性慢性咳嗽(RCC)患者治疗效果的一个重要终点:针对 RCC 患者的咳嗽严重程度,开发一种新的患者报告结果测量方法:第一阶段(项目生成):第 1 阶段(项目生成):通过系统调查、焦点小组和专家咨询生成 51 个项目。第 2 阶段(减少项目):100 名患者从 51 个项目列表中找出了他们在过去一年中经历过的项目,并按 5 分制评定其重要性。MCSQ 包括了据报告发生频率最高、重要性得分最高的项目。患者对 MCSQ 的反馈意见促使我们删除了多余的项目。另有 100 名患者完成了 MCSQ,我们在此基础上进行了探索性因子分析和 Rasch 分析,以进一步完善 MCSQ 的项目:第二阶段从最初的 51 个项目中筛选出 15 个项目。根据患者对这 15 个项目的反馈意见,我们删除了 5 个多余的项目。通过对 10 个项目的 MCSQ 进行探索性因素分析,选出了两个领域,删除了一个有交叉负荷的项目和另一个项目间相关性较高的项目。对 8 个项目的 MCSQ 进行的 Rasch 分析证实,回答选项的功能在逻辑上是递进的,没有项目显示出不同的项目功能。最终的 8 个项目 MCSQ 具有一周的回忆期,包括两个领域(强度和频率)。8个项目的MCSQ具有较高的内部一致性(Cronbach's alpha,0.89),能够区分不同程度的咳嗽(皮尔逊分离指数,0.89),与100毫米咳嗽严重程度视觉模拟量表具有较高的横断面收敛效度(皮尔逊相关性,0.76 [95% CI 0.66至0.83]):初步证据支持MCSQ的有效性,这是一种测量RCC患者咳嗽严重程度的8个项目的工具。未来的研究应评估其在测量随时间变化的特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Respiratory Journal
European Respiratory Journal 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
27.50
自引率
3.30%
发文量
345
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Respiratory Journal (ERJ) is the flagship journal of the European Respiratory Society. It has a current impact factor of 24.9. The journal covers various aspects of adult and paediatric respiratory medicine, including cell biology, epidemiology, immunology, oncology, pathophysiology, imaging, occupational medicine, intensive care, sleep medicine, and thoracic surgery. In addition to original research material, the ERJ publishes editorial commentaries, reviews, short research letters, and correspondence to the editor. The articles are published continuously and collected into 12 monthly issues in two volumes per year.
期刊最新文献
Airway derived emphysema-specific alveolar type II cells exhibit impaired regenerative potential in COPD. Pharmacological and pre-clinical safety profile of rSIV.F/HN, a hybrid lentiviral vector for cystic fibrosis gene therapy. Resolution of tuberculosis blood RNA signatures fails to discriminate persistent sputum culture positivity after 8 weeks of anti-tuberculous treatment. Microenvironmental acidification by pneumococcal sugar consumption fosters barrier disruption and immune suppression in the human alveolus. Single cell sequencing reveals cellular landscape alterations in the airway mucosa of patients with pulmonary long COVID.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1