Creating scenarios of the impact of COPD and their relationship to COPD Assessment Test (CAT™) scores

Paul W Jones, Margaret Tabberer, Wen-Hung Chen, Paul W Jones, Margaret Tabberer, Wen-Hung Chen

Abstract

Background: The COPD Assessment Test (CAT™) is a new short health status measure for routine use. New questionnaires require reference points so that users can understand the scores; descriptive scenarios are one way of doing this. A novel method of creating scenarios is described.

Methods: A Bland and Altman plot showed a consistent relationship between CAT scores and scores obtained with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-C) permitting a direct mapping process between CAT and SGRQ items. The severity associated with each CAT item was calculated using a probabilistic model and expressed in logits (log odds of a patient of given severity affirming that item 50% of the time). Severity estimates for SGRQ-C items in logits were also available, allowing direct comparisons with CAT items. CAT scores were categorised into Low, Medium, High and Very High Impact. SGRQ items of corresponding severity were used to create scenarios associated with each category.

Results: Each CAT category was associated with a scenario comprising 12 to 16 SGRQ-C items. A severity 'ladder' associating CAT scores with exemplar health status effects was also created. Items associated with 'Low' and 'Medium' Impact appeared to be subjectively quite severe in terms of their effect on daily life.

Conclusions: These scenarios provide users of the CAT with a good sense of the health impact associated with different scores. More generally they provide a surprising insight into the severity of the effects of COPD, even in patients with apparently mild-moderate health status impact.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cumulative frequency distribution of CAT scores.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mapping CAT scores to SGRQ items. See text for full explanation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bland and Altman plot of SGRQ and adjCAT scores. CAT scores were converted to 0 to 100% (adjCAT) to match SGRQ scores. The X axis is the mean of the SGRQ and adjCAT scores; the y axis is SGRQ-adjCAT score. The correlation for a linear regression was r = 0.16, p = 0.005.

References

    1. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guideline. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (updated 2009) last accessed 12 May 2011.
    1. Cazzola M, MacNee W, Martinez FJ, Rabe KF, Franciosi LG, Barnes PJ, Brusasco V, Burge PS, Calverley PM, Celli BR, Jones PW, Mahler DA, Make B, Miravitlles M, Page CP, Palange P, Parr D, Pistolesi M, Rennard SI, Rutten-van Mölken MP, Stockley R, Sullivan SD, Wedzicha JA, Wouters EF. American Thoracic Society; European Respiratory Society Task Force on outcomes of COPD. Outcomes for COPD pharmacological trials: from lung function to biomarkers. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:416–469. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00099306.
    1. Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, Pugsley SO, Chambers LW. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax. 1987;42:773–778. doi: 10.1136/thx.42.10.773.
    1. van der Molen T, Willemse BW, Schokker S, ten Hacken NH, Postma DS, Juniper EF. Development, validity and responsiveness of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:13. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-13. 28.
    1. Jones PW, Quirk FH, Baveystock CM. The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Respir Med. 1991;85(Suppl B):25–31.
    1. Meguro M, Barley EA, Spencer S, Jones PW. Development and validation of an improved COPD-specific version of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Chest. 2006;132:456–463.
    1. Jones PW. St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MCID. COPD. 2005;2:75–79. doi: 10.1081/COPD-200050513.
    1. Jones PW. Interpreting thresholds for a clinically significant changes in health status in asthma and COPD. Eur Respir J. 2002;19:398–404. doi: 10.1183/09031936.02.00063702.
    1. Jones PW, Harding G, Berry P, Wiklund I, Chen WH, Kline Leidy N. Development and first validation of the COPD Assessment Test. Eur Respir J. 2009;34:648–654. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00102509.
    1. Jones P, Harding G, Wiklund I, Berry P, Leidy N. Improving the process and outcome of care in COPD: development of a standardised assessment tool. Prim Care Respir J. 2009;18:208–215. doi: 10.4104/pcrj.2009.00053.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–310.
    1. Rasch G. AA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.
    1. Barley EA, Jones PW. Repeatability of a Rasch model of the AQ20 over five assessments. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:801–809. doi: 10.1007/s11136-005-5466-z.
    1. Andrich D, Sheridon BE, Luo G. AA. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2005. RUMM2020 (Rasch unidimensional measurement models)
    1. Hawthorne G, Densley K, Pallant JF, Mortimer D, Segal L. Deriving utility scores from the SF-36 health instrument using Rasch analysis. Qual Life Res. 2008;17:1183–1193. doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9395-5.
    1. Young TA, Rowen D, Norquist J, Brazier JE. Developing preference-based health measures: using Rasch analysis to generate health state values. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:907–917. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9646-0.
    1. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Glossary of Rasch Measurement Terminology Rasch Measurement Transactions. 2001. pp. 824–825. last accessed 12 May 2011.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir