The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2008
United States validation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR).
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gomberg-Maitland Mardi, Thenappan Thenappan, Rizvi Kamran, Chandra Sonal, Meads David M, McKenna Stephen P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) is the first pulmonary hypertension-specific instrument for assessing patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and quality of life. To enable use in the United States, this study adapted, field-tested, and evaluated its reliability and validity at a single center in Chicago.
METHODS: A lay panel confirmed appropriate wording of CAMPHOR for United States patients, and 15 patients with pulmonary hypertension field-tested the CAMPHOR for face and content validity. A postal validation study, with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey as a comparator, was sent to patients on 2 occasions, 2 weeks apart. World Health Organization (WHO) functional class and 6-minute walk test data were obtained.
RESULTS: Field-test interviews found the CAMPHOR relevant and comprehensible. A total of 147 patients (84.0% women) with a mean of 50 +/- 14.6 years participated in the validation study. The new scales had good test-retest reliability (range, 0.80-0.95) and internal consistency (range, 0.78-0.95). The CAMPHOR scales correlated with the SF-36 and 6-minute walk test. Patients in WHO functional class III had worse scores than those in class II (p = 0.02), as did patients who rated their health worse (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The US CAMPHOR is a reliable and valid measure of quality of life and health status in pulmonary hypertension and can be recommended for use in clinical practice and trials in the United States.
METHODS: A lay panel confirmed appropriate wording of CAMPHOR for United States patients, and 15 patients with pulmonary hypertension field-tested the CAMPHOR for face and content validity. A postal validation study, with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey as a comparator, was sent to patients on 2 occasions, 2 weeks apart. World Health Organization (WHO) functional class and 6-minute walk test data were obtained.
RESULTS: Field-test interviews found the CAMPHOR relevant and comprehensible. A total of 147 patients (84.0% women) with a mean of 50 +/- 14.6 years participated in the validation study. The new scales had good test-retest reliability (range, 0.80-0.95) and internal consistency (range, 0.78-0.95). The CAMPHOR scales correlated with the SF-36 and 6-minute walk test. Patients in WHO functional class III had worse scores than those in class II (p = 0.02), as did patients who rated their health worse (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The US CAMPHOR is a reliable and valid measure of quality of life and health status in pulmonary hypertension and can be recommended for use in clinical practice and trials in the United States.