Validation of a short form Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey (WURSS-21)

Bruce Barrett, Roger L Brown, Marlon P Mundt, Gay R Thomas, Shari K Barlow, Alex D Highstrom, Mozhdeh Bahrainian, Bruce Barrett, Roger L Brown, Marlon P Mundt, Gay R Thomas, Shari K Barlow, Alex D Highstrom, Mozhdeh Bahrainian

Abstract

Background: The Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey (WURSS) is an illness-specific health-related quality-of-life questionnaire outcomes instrument.

Objectives: Research questions were: 1) How well does the WURSS-21 assess the symptoms and functional impairments associated with common cold? 2) How well can this instrument measure change over time (responsiveness)? 3) What is the minimal important difference (MID) that can be detected by the WURSS-21? 4) What are the descriptive statistics for area under the time severity curve (AUC)? 5) What sample sizes would trials require to detect MID or AUC criteria? 6) What does factor analysis tell us about the underlying dimensional structure of the common cold? 7) How reliable are items, domains, and summary scores represented in WURSS? 8) For each of these considerations, how well does the WURSS-21 compare to the WURSS-44, Jackson, and SF-8?

Study design and setting: People with Jackson-defined colds were recruited from the community in and around Madison, Wisconsin. Participants were enrolled within 48 hours of first cold symptom and monitored for up to 14 days of illness. Half the sample filled out the WURSS-21 in the morning and the WURSS-44 in the evening, with the other half reversing the daily order. External comparators were the SF-8, a 24-hour recall general health measure yielding separate physical and mental health scores, and the eight-item Jackson cold index, which assesses symptoms, but not functional impairment or quality of life.

Results: In all, 230 participants were monitored for 2,457 person-days. Participants were aged 14 to 83 years (mean 34.1, SD 13.6), majority female (66.5%), mostly white (86.0%), and represented substantive education and income diversity. WURSS-21 items demonstrated similar performance when embedded within the WURSS-44 or in the stand-alone WURSS-21. Minimal important difference (MID) and Guyatt's responsiveness index were 10.3, 0.71 for the WURSS-21 and 18.5, 0.75 for the WURSS-44. Factorial analysis suggested an eight dimension structure for the WURSS-44 and a three dimension structure for the WURSS-21, with composite reliability coefficients ranging from 0.87 to 0.97, and Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.76 to 0.96. Both WURSS versions correlated significantly with the Jackson scale (W-21 R=0.85; W-44 R=0.88), with the SF-8 physical health (W-21 R=-0.79; W-44 R=-0.80) and SF-8 mental health (W-21 R=-0.55; W-44 R=-0.60).

Conclusion: The WURSS-44 and WURSS-21 perform well as illness-specific quality-of-life evaluative outcome instruments. Construct validity is supported by the data presented here. While the WURSS-44 covers more symptoms, the WURSS-21 exhibits similar performance in terms of reliability, responsiveness, importance-to-patients, and convergence with other measures.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Data shown represent Day 2 to Day 12. Sample size diminishes as participants’ colds resolve, from N=228 on Day 2 to N=100 on Day 12. The center of the notched boxes is the median summed score for that day. The notches portray the median ± 1.57 (interquartile range=IQR) / N-2 and thus can be compared to assess difference at the P = 0.05 level of significance. The top of the notched boxes indicate the 25% and 75% percentiles, respectively. The ends of the vertical lines indicate the last actual data point within 1.5 (IQR) from the 25%ile and 75%ile. The symbols above and below these lines are actual outlying data points.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Data shown represent Days 2, 3 and 4, where sample size was N = 228, N = 226 and N = 224, respectively. Day 3 Pearson correlations (95% confidence intervals) against the WURSS-21 were 0.925 (0.903, 0.942) for the WURSS-44, 0.849 (0.808, 0.882) for Jackson, -0.793 (-0.739, -0.837) for SF-8 physical, and -0.547 (-0.448, -0.632) for SF-8 mental. Correlations to the WURSS-44 were 0.879 (0.846, 0.906) for Jackson, -0.799 (-0.746, -0.842) for SF-8 physical, and -0.599 (-0.507, -0.677) for SF-8 mental. Jackson correlated to SF-8 physical at -0.748 (-0.684, -0.800) and to SF-8 mental at -0.555 (-0.457, -0.640). All associations were statistically significant at p < 0.001.

References

    1. Monto AS. Epidemiology of viral respiratory infections. American Journal of Medicine. 2002;112:12S.
    1. Gwaltney JM. Virology and immunology of the common cold. Rhinology. 1985;23:265–271.
    1. Williams JV, Harris PA, Tollefson SJ, Halburnt-Rush LL, Pingsterhaus JM, Edwards KM, Wright PF, Crowe JE. Human metapneumovirus and lower respiratory tract disease in otherwise healthy infants and children. New England Journal of Medicine. 2004;350:443–450. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa025472.
    1. Douglas RM. Respiratory tract infections as a public health challenge. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 1999;28:192–194. doi: 10.1086/515112.
    1. Dingle JH, Badger GF, Jordan WS. Illness in the home: A study of 25,000 illnesses in a group of Cleveland families. Cleveland: Press of Western Reserve University; 1964.
    1. Gwaltney JM, Hendley JO, Simon G, Jordan WS. Rhinovirus infections in an industrial population. JAMA. 1967;202:158–164. doi: 10.1001/jama.202.6.494.
    1. Monto AS, Ullman BM. Acute respiratory illness in an American community. JAMA. 1974;227:164–169. doi: 10.1001/jama.227.2.164.
    1. Fendrick AM, Monto AS, Nightengale B, Sarnes M. The economic burden of non-influenza-related viral respiratory tract infection in the United States. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2003;163:487–494. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.4.487.
    1. Gern JE, Vrtis R, Grindle KA, Swenson C, Busse WW. Relationship of upper and lower airway cytokines to outcome of experimental rhinovirus infection. American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine. 2000;162:2226–31.
    1. Cohen S, Doyle WJ, Skoner DP. Psychological stress, cytokine production, and severity of upper respiratory illness. Psychosomatic Medicine. 1999;61:175–180.
    1. Copenhaver CC, Gern JE, Li Z, Shult PA, Rosenthal LA, Mikus LD Kirk CJ, Roberg KA, Anderson EL, Tisler CJ, DaSilva DF, Hiemke HJ, Gentile K, Gangnon RE, Lemanske RF. Cytokine response patterns, exposure to viruses, and respiratory infections in the first year of life. American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine. 2004;170:175–180. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200312-1647OC.
    1. Garofalo R, Patel JA, Sim C, Schmalstieg FC, Goldman AS. Production of cytokines by virus-infected human respiratory epithelial cells. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1993;91:177.
    1. Linden M, Greiff L, Andersson M, Svensson C, Akerlund A, Bende M, Andersson E, Persson CG. Nasal cytokines in common cold and allergic rhinitis. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 1995;25:166–172. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.1995.tb01022.x.
    1. Noah TL, Henderson FW, Wortman IA, Devlin RB, Handy J, Koren HS, Becker S. Nasal cytokine production in viral acute upper respiratory infection of childhood. Journal of Infectious Disease. 1995;171:584–592.
    1. Turner RB. The treatment of rhinovirus infections: Progress and potential. Antiviral Res. 2001;49:1–14. doi: 10.1016/S0166-3542(00)00135-2.
    1. Barrett B, Brown R, Voland R, Maberry R, Turner R. Relations among questionnaire and laboratory measures of rhinovirus infection. European Respiratory Journal. 2006;28:358–363. doi: 10.1183/09031936.06.00002606.
    1. Jackson GG, Dowling HF, Spiesman IG, Boand AV. Transmission of the common cold to volunteers under controlled conditions. Arch Intern Med. 1958;101:267–278.
    1. Jackson GG, Dowling HF, Anderson TO, Riff L, Saporta J, Turck M. Susceptibility and immunity to common upper respiratory viral infections-the common cold. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1960;55:719–738.
    1. Jackson GG, Dowling HF, Muldoon RL. Present concepts of the common cold. Am J Public Health. 1962;52:940–945. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.52.6.940.
    1. McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
    1. Jacobs B, Young NL, Dick PT, Ipp MM, Dutkowski R, Davies HD, Langley JM, Greenberg S, Stephens D, Wang EEL. Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS): Development of a valid measure for childhood respiratory infections. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2000;53:793–799. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00238-3.
    1. Jacobs B, Young NL, Dick PT, Ipp MM, Dutkowski R, Davies D, Langley JM, Greenberg S, Stephens D, Wang EEL. CARIFS: The Canadian acute respiratory illness and flu scale. Pediatric Research. 1999;45:103A. doi: 10.1203/00006450-199904020-00615.
    1. Barrett B, Locken K, Maberry R, Schwamman J, Bobula J, Brown R, Stauffacher E. The Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey: Development of an instrument to measure the common cold. Journal of Family Practice. 2002;51:265–273.
    1. Barrett B, Brown R, Mundt M, Safdar N, Dye L, Maberry R, Alt J. The Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey is responsive, reliable, and valid. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2005;58:609–617. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.11.019.
    1. Guyatt GH, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:171–178. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90069-5.
    1. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jaeschke R. Measuring health status: What are the necessary measurement properties? J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:1341–1345. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90194-R.
    1. Guyatt GH, Deyo RA, Charlson M, Levine MN, Mitchell A. Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: a clarification. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 1989;42:403–408. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90128-5.
    1. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials. 1989;10:407–415. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6.
    1. Kirshner B, Guyatt GH. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chron Dis. 1985;38:27–36. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(85)90005-0.
    1. Gwaltney JM, Hendley JO, Simon G, Jordan WS. Rhinovirus infections in an industrial population. JAMA. 1967;202:158–164. doi: 10.1001/jama.202.6.494.
    1. Gwaltney JM, Buier RM, Rogers JL. The influence of signal variation, bias, noise and effect size on statistical significance in treatment studies of the common cold. Antiviral Research. 1996;29:287–295. doi: 10.1016/0166-3542(95)00935-3.
    1. Gwaltney JM. Viral respiratory infection therapy: historical perspectives and current trials. American Journal of Medicine. 2002;112:l–41S.
    1. Monto AS. Viral respiratory infections in the community: Epidemiology, agents, and interventions. American Journal of Medicine. 1995;99:24S–27S. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9343(99)80307-6.
    1. Eccles R. Pathophysiology of nasal symptoms. American Journal of Rhinology. 2000;14:335–338. doi: 10.2500/105065800781329528.
    1. Eccles R. Understanding the symptoms of the common cold and influenza. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2005;5:718–725. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(05)70270-X.
    1. Turner RB. Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and treatment of the common cold. Annals of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology. 1997;78:531–539.
    1. Turner RB, Witek TJ, Riker DK. Comparison of symptom severity in natural and experimentally induced cold. American Journal of Rhinology. 1996;10:167–172. doi: 10.2500/105065896781794888.
    1. Turner RB. New considerations in the treatment and prevention of rhinovirus infections. Pediatric Annals. 2005;34:53–57.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics Notes: Validating scales and indexes. British Medical Journal. 2002;324:606–607. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7337.606.
    1. Ware JE., Jr Standards for validating health measures: definition and content. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1987;40:473–480. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90003-8.
    1. Wittenborn JR. Reliability, validity, and objectivity of symptom-rating scales. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1972;154:79–87. doi: 10.1097/00005053-197202000-00001.
    1. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE, Gandek B. How to score and interpret single-item health status measures: A manual for users of the SF-8 health survey. Lincoln RI: QualityMetric; 2001.
    1. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR, Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2002;77:371–383. doi: 10.4065/77.4.371.
    1. Redelmeier DA, Guyatt GH, Goldstein RS. Assessing the minimal important difference in symptoms: A comparison of two techniques. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1215–1219. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00206-5.
    1. Barrett B, Brown R, Mundt M. Comparison of anchor-based and distributional approaches in estimating important difference in common cold. Qual Life Res. 2008;17:75–85. doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9277-2.
    1. Barrett B, Brown R, Mundt M, Dye L, Alt J, Safdar N, Maberry R. Using benefit harm tradeoffs to estimate sufficiently important difference: the case of the common cold. Medical Decision Making. 2005;25:47–55. doi: 10.1177/0272989X04273147.
    1. Barrett B, Brown D, Mundt M, Brown R. Sufficiently important difference: expanding the framework of clinical significance. Medical Decision Making. 2005;25:250–261. doi: 10.1177/0272989X05276863.
    1. Barrett B, Harahan B, Brown D, Zhang Z, Brown R. Sufficiently important difference for common cold: severity reduction. Ann Fam Med. 2007;5:216–223. doi: 10.1370/afm.698.
    1. Barrett B, Endrizzi S, Andreoli P, Barlow S, Zhang Z. Clinical significance of common cold treatment: professionals' opinions. Wisconsin Medical Journal. 2007;106:473–480.
    1. Kroonenberg PM, Lewis C. Methodological issues in the search for a factor model: Exploration through confirmation. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1982;7:69–89. doi: 10.2307/1164958.
    1. Joreskog KA. Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika. 1971;36:109–133. doi: 10.1007/BF02291393.
    1. Bollen KA. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1989.
    1. Muthen LK, Muthen BO. Mplus Version 51. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen and Muthen; 2008.
    1. Potthoff RF, Tudor GE, Pieper KS, Hasselblad V. Can one assess whether missing data are missing at random in medical studies? Stat Methods Med Res. 2006;15:213–234. doi: 10.1191/0962280206sm448oa.
    1. Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1990.
    1. Altman DG. Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991.
    1. Barrett B, Rakel D, Chewning B, Marchand L, Rabago D, Brown R, Scheder J, Schmidt R, Gern JE, Bone K, Thomas G, Barlow S, Bobula J. Rationale and methods for a trial assessing placebo, echinacea, and doctor-patient interaction in the common cold. Explore (NY) 2007;3:561–572.
    1. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6:1–55.
    1. Lydick E, Epstein RS, Himmelberger D, White CJ. Area under the curve: a metric for patient subjective responses in episodic diseases. Quality of Life Research. 1995;4:41–45. doi: 10.1007/BF00434382.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다