Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lozano,Francisco
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Lobos,José María, March,José Ramón, Carrasco,Eduardo, Barros,Marcello Barbosa, González-Porras,José Ramón
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: São Paulo medical journal (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802016000100063
Resumo: CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Many clinical investigations use generic and/or specific questionnaires to obtain information about participants and patients. There is disagreement about whether the administration method can affect the results. The aim here was to determine whether, among patients with intermittent claudication (IC), there are differences in the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores with regard to: 1) the questionnaire administration method (self-administration versus face-to-face interview); and 2) the type of interviewer (vascular surgeon, VS, versus general practitioner, GP). DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional observational multicenter epidemiological study carried out within the Spanish National Health Service. METHODS: 1,641 evaluable patients with IC firstly completed the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires and then were interviewed by their doctor on the same day. Pearson correlations and Chi-square tests were used. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation (r > 0.800; P < 0.001) between the two methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, and between the VS and GP groups. Likewise, there was a high level of concordance (P > 0.05) between the different dimensions of the WIQ-distance and EQ-5D (self-administration versus face-to-face) in the VS and GP groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between the different methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, among the patients with IC. Similarly, the two types of interviewers (VS or GP) were equally valid. Therefore, it seems unnecessary to expend effort to administer these questionnaires by interview, in studies on IC.
id APM-1_a12e14e8bde761d3d3d4d61f188c4381
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-31802016000100063
network_acronym_str APM-1
network_name_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional studyIntermittent claudicationQuality of lifeQuestionnairesValidation studiesPeripheral arterial disease CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Many clinical investigations use generic and/or specific questionnaires to obtain information about participants and patients. There is disagreement about whether the administration method can affect the results. The aim here was to determine whether, among patients with intermittent claudication (IC), there are differences in the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores with regard to: 1) the questionnaire administration method (self-administration versus face-to-face interview); and 2) the type of interviewer (vascular surgeon, VS, versus general practitioner, GP). DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional observational multicenter epidemiological study carried out within the Spanish National Health Service. METHODS: 1,641 evaluable patients with IC firstly completed the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires and then were interviewed by their doctor on the same day. Pearson correlations and Chi-square tests were used. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation (r > 0.800; P < 0.001) between the two methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, and between the VS and GP groups. Likewise, there was a high level of concordance (P > 0.05) between the different dimensions of the WIQ-distance and EQ-5D (self-administration versus face-to-face) in the VS and GP groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between the different methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, among the patients with IC. Similarly, the two types of interviewers (VS or GP) were equally valid. Therefore, it seems unnecessary to expend effort to administer these questionnaires by interview, in studies on IC.Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM2016-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802016000100063Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.134 n.1 2016reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APM10.1590/1516-3180.2015.01733009info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLozano,FranciscoLobos,José MaríaMarch,José RamónCarrasco,EduardoBarros,Marcello BarbosaGonzález-Porras,José Ramóneng2016-09-13T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-31802016000100063Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2016-09-13T00:00São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
title Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
spellingShingle Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
Lozano,Francisco
Intermittent claudication
Quality of life
Questionnaires
Validation studies
Peripheral arterial disease
title_short Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
title_full Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
title_sort Self-administered versus interview-based questionnaires among patients with intermittent claudication: Do they give different results? A cross-sectional study
author Lozano,Francisco
author_facet Lozano,Francisco
Lobos,José María
March,José Ramón
Carrasco,Eduardo
Barros,Marcello Barbosa
González-Porras,José Ramón
author_role author
author2 Lobos,José María
March,José Ramón
Carrasco,Eduardo
Barros,Marcello Barbosa
González-Porras,José Ramón
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lozano,Francisco
Lobos,José María
March,José Ramón
Carrasco,Eduardo
Barros,Marcello Barbosa
González-Porras,José Ramón
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Intermittent claudication
Quality of life
Questionnaires
Validation studies
Peripheral arterial disease
topic Intermittent claudication
Quality of life
Questionnaires
Validation studies
Peripheral arterial disease
description CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Many clinical investigations use generic and/or specific questionnaires to obtain information about participants and patients. There is disagreement about whether the administration method can affect the results. The aim here was to determine whether, among patients with intermittent claudication (IC), there are differences in the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores with regard to: 1) the questionnaire administration method (self-administration versus face-to-face interview); and 2) the type of interviewer (vascular surgeon, VS, versus general practitioner, GP). DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional observational multicenter epidemiological study carried out within the Spanish National Health Service. METHODS: 1,641 evaluable patients with IC firstly completed the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires and then were interviewed by their doctor on the same day. Pearson correlations and Chi-square tests were used. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation (r > 0.800; P < 0.001) between the two methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, and between the VS and GP groups. Likewise, there was a high level of concordance (P > 0.05) between the different dimensions of the WIQ-distance and EQ-5D (self-administration versus face-to-face) in the VS and GP groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between the different methods of administering the WIQ and EQ-5D questionnaires, among the patients with IC. Similarly, the two types of interviewers (VS or GP) were equally valid. Therefore, it seems unnecessary to expend effort to administer these questionnaires by interview, in studies on IC.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-02-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802016000100063
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802016000100063
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1516-3180.2015.01733009
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.134 n.1 2016
reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)
instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron:APM
instname_str Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron_str APM
institution APM
reponame_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
collection São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistas@apm.org.br
_version_ 1754209264945070080