These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of two simple measures to evaluate the health status of asthmatics: the Asthma Bother Profile and the Airways Questionnaire 20.
    Author: Nishimura K, Hajiro T, Oga T, Tsukino M, Sato S, Ikeda A.
    Journal: J Asthma; 2004 Apr; 41(2):141-6. PubMed ID: 15115166.
    Abstract:
    Simple and concise measures for health status are desirable in clinical practice. The Asthma Bother Profile (ABP), which consists of 23 items, has been developed to assess how much asthma bothers patients. The Airways Questionnaire 20 (AQ20) is a simple instrument which consists of 20 items. The purpose of this study was to investigate how the ABP and AQ20 evaluate the health status of patients with asthma. A total of 166 patients with chronic asthma (age: 48 +/- 16 yr, 77 males) completed pulmonary function testing, measurement of airway hyperresponsiveness, dyspnea rating, assessments of their anxiety and depression (HADS; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and assessments of their health status. The health status was assessed using the ABP, AQ20, the short-form 36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36), the Living With Asthma Questionnaire (LWAQ) and the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). The Japanese version of the ABP included only 15 'bother' items out of the original 23 items due to cultural differences. The scores on the ABP were widely distributed, whereas the scores on the AQ20 were skewed towards the milder end of the scale. The ABP had a strong correlation with the Avoidance and Distress constructs on the LWAQ, and Anxiety and Depression on the HADS (Rs = 0.56 to approximately 0.79), and its strongest correlation with the General Health (Rs = -0.64) scale among the 8 subscales on the SF-36. The AQ20 had a less significant correlation with the LWAQ, AQLQ, and SF-36 than the ABP. The ABP and AQ20 were short and simple to complete, and both measures could easily be used in clinical practice. The ABP can evaluate patients more specifically with respect to distress and bother than the AQ20.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]