0
Abstract: Slide Presentations |

A WEB EQUIVALENCE AND SUBGROUP STUDY OF THE CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE POPULATION SCREENER FREE TO VIEW

Jennifer L. Beaumont, MS*; David Victorson, PhD; Tammy G. Curtice, PharmD; Christine L. Baker, MPH; Hemal Shah, PharmD; David Cella, PhD
Author and Funding Information

Northwestern University, Chicago, IL


Chest


Chest. 2009;136(4_MeetingAbstracts):62S. doi:10.1378/chest.136.4_MeetingAbstracts.62S-g
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Abstract

PURPOSE:  The COPD Population Screener (COPD-PS) is a brief (5-item), self-reported and scored questionnaire that focuses on five domains known to predict airflow obstruction indicative of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): breathlessness, productive cough, activity level, smoking history, age. The COPD-PS was developed and validated to identify people likely to have COPD in the general population. A total score >5 (out of a possible 10), indicates that breathing problems may be caused by COPD. The objective of this study was to assess the equivalence of web- versus paper-administration and obtain descriptive data in important subgroups.

METHODS:  A two-arm randomized study of internet versus paper was planned with ∼1,000 adults at least 35 years of age enrolled using an online panel survey organization. All participants completed a set of sociodemographic/clinical questions, the COPD-PS, the Medical Research Council (MRC) Dyspnea Scale, and a brief feasibility/acceptability survey. In order to have a large enough sample to evaluate the COPD-PS in subgroups defined by gender, smoking status and disease diagnoses, an additional ∼3,000 participants were recruited to participate in web-administration.

RESULTS:  A total of 1,006 adults completed the randomized study (N=504 online, N=502 by mail). Forty-seven percent were male and the mean age (SD) was 55.0 years (11.4). There were more smokers in the web-administration arm (29%) compared to the paper-administration arm (20%; p = 0.001). There were no differences between the arms in mean COPD-PS scores (mean difference: 0.12; 95% CI: −0.14-+0.37; p=0.095). In the paper-administration arm, 101/502 (20.1%) exceeded the screening cut-off compared to 106/504 (21.0%) in the web arm (difference in proportions: 0.9%; 95% CI: −4.1%-+5.9%; p=0.720). Subgroup analyses on a separate cohort of 3,001 adults are presented in the Table.

CONCLUSION:  The web-based administration of the COPD-PS performed in an equivalent manner to the paper-administered version and demonstrated sensitivity in identifying sub-groups expected to score higher on the screener.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:  Both paper and internet are acceptable methods for administration of the COPD-PS for screening in the general population.

DISCLOSURE:  Jennifer Beaumont, Employee Curtice, Shah: employed by Boehringer IngelheimBaker: employed by Pfizer; Other Beaumont, Victorson, Cella: Department in which employed provides consulting services to Boehringer Ingelheim.; No Product/Research Disclosure Information

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

2:15 PM - 3:15 PM


Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543