{"title":"[Specific foreign tools for assessing the quality of life of patients with COPD].","authors":"D A Andreev, N N Kamynina","doi":"10.32687/0869-866X-2024-32-s2-1057-1062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) usually have a decreased quality of life (QOL). Specialized questionnaires on QOL may be more sensitive when studying individual issues of COPD therapy than general (universal) questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Goal: </strong>Conducting a review of specific tools for assessing the quality of life of patients with COPD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was carried out based on the results of a search of scientific literature presented in the bibliographic databases PubMed (USA) and ELIBRARY.RU (Russia, Russian-language sources). Keywords were used to search for relevant sources: «quality of life», «COPD», «chronic obstructive pulmonary disease» etc. In order to search for information on individual questionnaires, queries containing the names of the questionnaires were used. Additional references were obtained using the search engines Google and Yandex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on the results of a study of the scientific literature and a search in the PubMed / Medline information base, 22 specific tests used to assess the quality of life of patients with COPD were considered. These tests demonstrate different relevance and scientific applicability in recent years. Five tests were most often used in foreign and domestic studies: St. George respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ), the COPD assessment test (CAT), the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC), the chronic respiratory questionnaire (CRQ), the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Further study as well as local adaptation (if so required) of some questionnaires will open up new opportunities for their wider implementation into the routine daily practice of providing medical care to patients with COPD in the regions.</p>","PeriodicalId":35946,"journal":{"name":"Problemy sotsial''noi gigieny i istoriia meditsiny / NII sotsial''noi gigieny, ekonomiki i upravleniia zdravookhraneniem im. N.A. Semashko RAMN, AO ''Assotsiatsiia ''Meditsinskaia literatura''","volume":"32 Special 2","pages":"1057-1062"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Problemy sotsial''noi gigieny i istoriia meditsiny / NII sotsial''noi gigieny, ekonomiki i upravleniia zdravookhraneniem im. N.A. Semashko RAMN, AO ''Assotsiatsiia ''Meditsinskaia literatura''","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32687/0869-866X-2024-32-s2-1057-1062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) usually have a decreased quality of life (QOL). Specialized questionnaires on QOL may be more sensitive when studying individual issues of COPD therapy than general (universal) questionnaires.

Goal: Conducting a review of specific tools for assessing the quality of life of patients with COPD.

Materials and methods: The study was carried out based on the results of a search of scientific literature presented in the bibliographic databases PubMed (USA) and ELIBRARY.RU (Russia, Russian-language sources). Keywords were used to search for relevant sources: «quality of life», «COPD», «chronic obstructive pulmonary disease» etc. In order to search for information on individual questionnaires, queries containing the names of the questionnaires were used. Additional references were obtained using the search engines Google and Yandex.

Results: Based on the results of a study of the scientific literature and a search in the PubMed / Medline information base, 22 specific tests used to assess the quality of life of patients with COPD were considered. These tests demonstrate different relevance and scientific applicability in recent years. Five tests were most often used in foreign and domestic studies: St. George respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ), the COPD assessment test (CAT), the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC), the chronic respiratory questionnaire (CRQ), the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ).

Conclusion: Further study as well as local adaptation (if so required) of some questionnaires will open up new opportunities for their wider implementation into the routine daily practice of providing medical care to patients with COPD in the regions.

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
[用于评估慢性阻塞性肺病患者生活质量的特定外国工具]。
简介慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)患者的生活质量(QOL)通常会下降。在研究慢性阻塞性肺病治疗的个别问题时,专门的 QOL 问卷可能比一般(通用)问卷更敏感。目标:对评估慢性阻塞性肺病患者生活质量的专门工具进行综述:本研究是在PubMed(美国)和ELIBRARY.RU(俄罗斯,俄语资源)书目数据库中科学文献检索结果的基础上进行的。关键词用于搜索相关资料:"生活质量"、"慢性阻塞性肺病"、"慢性阻塞性肺病 "等。为了搜索个别问卷的信息,使用了包含问卷名称的查询。此外,还使用 Google 和 Yandex.Results 搜索引擎获取了其他参考资料:根据对科学文献的研究结果以及在 PubMed / Medline 信息库中的搜索,考虑了 22 种用于评估慢性阻塞性肺病患者生活质量的特定测试。近年来,这些测试显示出不同的相关性和科学适用性。在国外和国内的研究中,有五种测试最为常用:圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)、慢性阻塞性肺病评估测试(CAT)、医学研究委员会呼吸困难量表(mMRC)、慢性呼吸问卷(CRQ)、慢性阻塞性肺病临床问卷(CCQ):结论:对一些问卷的进一步研究和本地化调整(如有需要)将为这些问卷在各地区慢性阻塞性肺病患者的日常医疗护理工作中更广泛地实施提供新的机会。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
234
期刊最新文献
[The comparative analysis of correspondence of normative and factual number of stomatologists considering private medical organizations]. [G. A. Miterev, the director of the Erisman Central Research Sanitary Institute]. [On the issue of determining notions "medical malpractice", "yatrogeny" and "defect of medical care": social legal aspects]. [The analysis of medical demographic indicators of rural population]. [The attraction of medical workers to civil and administrative responsibility].
×
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