IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0215544.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A breath of fresh air: Validity and reliability of a Portuguese version of the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile for patients with COPD

Author

Listed:
  • Letícia F Belo
  • Antenor Rodrigues
  • Ana Paula Vicentin
  • Thaís Paes
  • Larissa Araújo de Castro
  • Nidia A Hernandes
  • Fabio Pitta

Abstract

Aim: To provide a Portuguese version of the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile (MDP), investigating its validity and reliability in Brazilian patients with COPD. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study for translation and linguist validation of the Portuguese MDP version for patients with COPD. The process occurred according to the protocol of Mapi Research Trust, Lyon, France. Three scores of MDP were used for the analysis: the immediate unpleasantness of dyspnea (A1); the “immediate perception domain” (S) (sum of A1 plus the sensory descriptors) and the “emotional response domain” (A2) (sum of the emotional descriptors). The questionnaires COPD assessment Test (CAT), Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS) and Medical Research Council scale (MRC) were used as anchors to investigate MDP’s validity. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha. Test–retest reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and concurrent validity was assessed with Spearman correlation coefficients. Results: Thirty patients with moderate-severe COPD were studied for MDP’s validation analysis (43% male, 63±8years, body mass index [BMI] 27±6Kg/m2, forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1] 48±15%predicted, six-minute walking test [6MWT] 464±84m and 84±16%predicted), whereas 10 patients were excluded from the test-retest reliability analysis due to missing data, resulting in a sample of 20 subjects for this purpose (50% male, 62±8years, BMI 27±6Kg/m2, FEV1 48±15%predicted, 6MWT 452±93m and 82±19%predicted). Both samples were similar regarding general characteristics (P>0,05 for all variables). MDP presented strong correlations, i.e., ICC intra-rater: A1: 0.77 (0.48–0.90), S: 0.78 (0.52–0.91), and A2: 0.85 (0.66–0.94), with high internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.86, 0.88 and 0.92 respectively); and ICC inter-rater: A1: 0.74 (0.46–0.89), S: 0.75 (0.48–0.89) and A2: 0.91 (0.78–0.96) with Cronbach's α 0.85, 0.86 and 0.95 respectively. Conclusion: The Portuguese version of the MDP is the first valid and reliable instrument to assess dyspnea multidimensionally in Portuguese-speaking patients with COPD.

Suggested Citation

  • Letícia F Belo & Antenor Rodrigues & Ana Paula Vicentin & Thaís Paes & Larissa Araújo de Castro & Nidia A Hernandes & Fabio Pitta, 2019. "A breath of fresh air: Validity and reliability of a Portuguese version of the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile for patients with COPD," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-7, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0215544
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215544
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215544&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0215544?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0215544. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.