ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a disabling health condition, and there is no disease-specific patient-reported outcome instrument to assess individuals with OSA. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with OSA. METHODS: One hundred individuals with OSA responded to the WHODAS 2.0 version of 36 items, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the 12-item health survey (SF-12). Internal consistency, convergent and discriminative validity, and responsiveness to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) were the psychometric properties tested. RESULTS: Cronbach's α values indicate good internal consistency (0.91 - 0.73), except for the self-care domain (α = 0.52). Convergent validity indicated an excellent correlation (r = -0.80) between the domains of functioning and quality of life. Discriminative validity showed no association between OSA severity and functioning (p = 0.90). The responsiveness to CPAP treatment showed a large effect size (r = 0.82; p < 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: The WHODAS 2.0 instrument is valid, reliable, and responsive for assessing individuals with OSA.
Subject(s)
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Disability Evaluation , Psychometrics , Quality of Life , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive , World Health Organization , Humans , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/diagnosis , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/therapy , Male , Female , Brazil , Reproducibility of Results , Middle Aged , Psychometrics/instrumentation , Psychometrics/methods , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods , Quality of Life/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Severity of Illness Index , Aged , Polysomnography/methodsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: COPD fits the profile of disabling health conditions. This study aims to validate the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with COPD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 100 participants with COPD responded to the Brazilian 36-item version of the WHODAS 2.0, as well as the Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Spirometric data was extracted from medical records. RESULTS: The internal consistency analysis showed coefficients for all WHODAS 2.0 domains with a strong correlation (0.70-0.85) except for Life activities, which had a moderate correlation (coefficient = 0.60). In the construct analysis, the coefficients for the WHODAS and SGRQ domains presented a consistent correlation among them, varying from 0.40 to 0.69. No correlation was evidenced among the WHODAS domains and the spirometric data, highlighting that linear measures fail when associated with the functioning of an individual with COPD. Discriminative analysis revealed a capacity for the WHODAS 2.0 to distinguish among COPD different levels of clinical impact obtained from CAT excluding the Getting along domain. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS 2.0 shows as a valid instrument that can sensibly assess functioning differences related to the clinical impact classification level in subjects with COPD.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONWHODAS 2.0 is a valid tool to assess functioning in subjects with COPD.WHODAS 2.0 is sensitive to functioning differences related to classification level and to clinical impact in individuals with COPD.As a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM), WHODAS 2.0 offers the opportunity to develop clinical patient-centered interventions, improving the health care.As a low-cost, easy-to-use tool, WHODAS can be a useful resource in the process of clinical assessment of patient functioning.
