The reliability of an arabic version of the self-administered standardized chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ-SAS)

11Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: To produce a conceptually equivalent Arabic version to the original Self-Administered Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire with standardized dyspnea domain (CRQ-SAS) and to assess its reliability.Methods: The study was carried out in two stages: stage I which was the translation of the CRQ-SAS questionnaire from the English to the Arabic language, and stage II which represented the test-retest reliability for patients receiving usual care for COPD who were not yet admitted to the pulmonary rehabilitation program.Results: Forty five patients with stable COPD were enrolled in this study. Strong test-retest reliability was found for the four domains of the CRQ-SAS, with the intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.97 for each of the domains. The association between most parameters and the four domains of CRQ-SAS were not found to be statistically significant, as measured by Pearson correlation. The number of exacerbations was negatively correlated with the dyspnea domain (correlation = -0.36, p-value = 0.02). The disease duration was negatively correlated with the domain fatigue (correlation = -0.35, p-value = 0.02). The correlation between FEV1/FVC ratio and emotion domain was -0.30 (p-value = 0.05). The mastery domain was negatively correlated with FEV1/FVC ratio with a correlation of -0.27 with borderline statistical significance (p-value = 0.07).Conclusion: The Arabic translation of the CRQ-SAS was found to be reliable to assess the quality of life among patients with COPD. © 2011 Al Moamary and Tamim; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Al Moamary, M. S., & Tamim, H. M. (2011). The reliability of an arabic version of the self-administered standardized chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ-SAS). BMC Pulmonary Medicine, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-11-21

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free