NCT
HOME CURRENT ARCHIVE COVID-19
HOME CURRENT ARCHIVE PUBLISH INSTRUCTIONS
FOR AUTHORS COVID-19 LOG IN / REGISTER HISTORY ABOUT US DIRECTORY CONTACT
Clinimetric performance of the COPD Assessment Test

Pedrozo-Pupo, John Carlos; Campo-Arias, Adalberto





2017, Number 3

2017; 76 (3)






ABSTRACT

Background: The COPD assessment test (CAT) is a tool to assess the quality of life among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, its reliability and dimensionality are unknown in the Colombian context. Objective: To know the reliability and dimensional of CAT in a sample of patients from the city of Santa Marta, Colombia. Material and method: A clinimetric or methodological study was designed with participation of 292 adults suffered from COPD, aged between 49 and 95 years (mean = 73.5, SD = 8.7), 61.6% of sample were men and 38.4%, women. Participants completed the eight items of CAT. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega) and dimensionality (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, EFA and CFA) were determined. Results: Internal consistency of 0.71 was observed for both Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega. The solution for the one dimension explained 34.4% of the variance, with poor indicators of goodness adjustments in the CFA (χ2 = 126.1, df = 20, p = 0.001, RMSEA = 0.13, IC 90% 0.11-0.15, CFI = 0.75, TLI = 0.66 and SMSR = 0.08). Conclusions: The CAT has modest internal consistency; however, the one-dimensional structure shows poor goodness of fit in patients with COPD in Santa Marta, Colombia. It is necessary to corroborate these findings in other populations.

KEYWORDS

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, quality of life, reliability and validity, validation studies.

REFERENCES

  1. Keszei AP, Novak M, Streiner DL. Introduction to health measurement scales. J Psychosom Res 2010;68(4):319-323. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.01.006.

  2. 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(3):648-654. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00102509.

  3. Gupta N, Pinto LM, Morogan A, Bourbeau J. The COPD assessment test: a systematic review. Eur Respir J 2014;44(4):873-884. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00025214.

  4. Weldam SW, Schuurmans MJ, Liu R, Lammers JW. Evaluation of quality of life instruments for use in COPD care and research: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud 2013;50(5):688-707. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.07.017.

  5. Jones PW. The COPD Assessment Test: what have we learned over its first 5 years? Eur Respir J 2014;44(4):833-834. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00125214.

  6. Hwang YI, Jung KS, Lim SY, Lee YS, Kwon NH. A validation study for the Korean version of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT). Tuberc Respir Dis 2013;74(6):256-263. doi: 10.4046/trd.2013.74.6.256.

  7. Silva GP, Morano MT, Viana CM, Magalhães CB, Pereira ED. Portuguese-language version of the COPD Assessment Test: validation for use in Brazil. J Bras Pneumol 2013;39(4):402-408. doi: 10.1590/S1806-37132013000400002.

  8. Agustí A, Fernández-Villar A, Capelastegui A, García-Losa M, Velasco B, Sánchez G. Estudio de la validez de las versiones en catalán, gallego y vasco del cuestionario COPD assessment test y equivalencia con la versión en castellano. Arch Bronconeumol 2017;53(6):311-317. doi: 10.1016/j.arbres.2016.10.003.

  9. Lari SM, Ghobadi H, Attaran D, Mahmoodpour A, Shadkam O, Rostami M. COPD assessment test (CAT): simple tool for evaluating quality of life of chemical warfare patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Clin Respir J 2014;8(1):116-123. doi: 10.1111/crj.12047.

  10. Pothirat C, Kiatboonsri S, Chuchottaworn C. Validation of the new COPD assessment test translated into Thai in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMC Pulm Med 2014;14(1):193. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-14-193.

  11. Tu YH, Zhang Y, Fei GH. Utility of the CAT in the therapy assessment of COPD exacerbations in China. BMC Pulm Med 2014;14(1):42. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-14-42.

  12. Dal Negro RW, Bonadiman L, Turco P. Sensitivity of the COPD assessment test (CAT questionnaire) investigated in a population of 681 consecutive patients referring to a lung clinic: the first Italian specific study. Multidiscip Respir Med 2014;9(1):15. doi: 10.1186/2049-6958-9-15.

  13. Lee SD, Huang MS, Kang J, et al. The COPD assessment test (CAT) assists prediction of COPD exacerbations in high-risk patients. Respir Med 2014;108(4):600-608. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.12.014.

  14. Yoshimoto D, Nakano Y, Onishi K, Hagan G, Jones P. The relationship between the COPD Assessment Test score and airflow limitation in Japan in patients aged over 40 years with a smoking history. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2014;9:1357-1363. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S61265.

  15. Campo-Arias A, Oviedo HC. Propiedades psicométricas de una escala: la consistencia interna. Rev Salud Pública 2008;10(5):831-839.

  16. Bacchetti P. Current sample size conventions: flaws, harms, and alternatives. BMC Med 2010;8(1):17. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-17.

  17. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. GOLD 2017. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management and Prevent of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, updated 2014. Fecha de acceso: 01-05-2017. Disponible en: http://www.goldcopd.org

  18. Ramada-Rodilla JM, Serra-Pujadas C, Delclós-Clanchet GL. Adaptación cultural y validación de cuestionarios de salud: revisión y recomendaciones metodológicas. Salud Publica Mex 2013;55(1):57-66. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0036-36342013000100009

  19. Agusti A, Soler-Cataluña JJ, Molina J, et al. Does the COPD assessment test (CAT(TM)) questionnaire produce similar results when self-or interviewer-administered? Qual Life Res 2015;24(10):2345-2354. doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-0983-x.

  20. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychometrika 1951;16(3):297-334. doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555.

  21. McDonald RP. The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis and alpha factor analysis. Br J Math Stat Psychol 1970;23(Part 1):1-21.

  22. Spearman C. Correlation calculated from faulty data. Br J Psychol 1910;3(3):271-295.

  23. Bartlett MS. Test of significance in factor analysis. Br J Psychol 1950;3(1):77-85.

  24. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 1974;39(1):31-36.

  25. IBM-SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 22.0. Armonk: SPSS. Inc.; 2013.

  26. STATA 13.0. College Station: STATA; 2013.

  27. Domínguez-Lara S, Merino-Soto C. Una modificación del coeficiente alfa de Cronbach por errores correlacionados (Cartas al Editor). Rev Med Chile 2017;145(2):270-271.

  28. Campo-Arias A, Herazo E, Oviedo HC. Análisis de factores: fundamentos para la evaluación de instrumentos de medición en salud mental. Rev Colomb Psiquiat 2012;41(3):659-671.

  29. Sobrino E, Fernández PA, Molinari L, Arce S. Lectura crítica: Validez interna. Rev Arg Med Respir 2006;6(2):77-83.

  30. Post MW. What to do with “moderate” reliability and validity coefficients? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97(7):1051-1052. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.04.001.


2017, Number 3

2017; 76 (3)