Validation of a health-related quality of life instrument for primary ciliary dyskinesia (QOL-PCD). Issue 9 (28th February 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Behan, Laura; Leigh, Margaret W; Dell, Sharon D; Dunn Galvin, Audrey; Quittner, Alexandra L; Lucas, Jane S
• Is Part Of: Thorax. Volume 72:Issue 9(2017)
• Page Start: 832
• Page End: 839
• Publication Date: 2017-02-28
• Subjects: Rare lung diseases -- Respiratory Measurement -- Psychology; Chest -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Thorax; Chest -- Diseases; Periodicals; Periodicals; 617.54
• DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-209356
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0040-6376

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Quality of life (QOL)-primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is the first disease-specific, health-related QOL instrument for PCD. Psychometric validation of QOL-PCD assesses the performance of this measure in adults, including its reliability, validity and responsiveness to change. Methods: Seventy-two adults (mean (range) age: 33 years (18–79 years); mean (range) FEV1 % predicted: 68 (26–115)) with PCD completed the 49-item QOL-PCD and generic QOL measures: Short-Form 36 Health Survey, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 20 (SNOT-20) and St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ)-C. Thirty-five participants repeated QOL-PCD 10–14 days later to measure stability or reproducibility of the measure. Results: Multitrait analysis was used to evaluate how the items loaded on 10 hypothesised scales: physical, emotional, role and social functioning, treatment burden, vitality, health perceptions, upper respiratory symptoms, lower respiratory symptoms and ears and hearing symptoms. This analysis of item-to-total correlations led to 9 items being dropped; the validated measure now comprises 40 items. Each scale had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α: 0.74 to 0.94). Two-week test–retest demonstrated stability for all scales (intraclass coefficients 0.73 to 0.96). Significant correlations were obtained between QOL-PCD scores and age and FEV1 . Strong relationships were also found between QOL-PCD scales and similar constructs on generic questionnaires, for example, lower respiratory symptoms and SGRQ-C (r=0.72, p<0.001), while weak correlations were found between measures of different constructs. Conclusions: QOL-PCD has demonstrated good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, convergent and divergent validity. QOL-PCD offers a promising tool for evaluating new therapies and for measuring symptoms, functioning and QOL during routine care.