Validation of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument in People Living with COPD

BACKGROUND: Disability and loss of function are acknowledged as important problems for people living with COPD, but there is a need for validated tools to assess them. RESEARCH QUESTION: The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI) was originally validated for community-dwelling older ad...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ann Am Thorac Soc 2024-09, Vol.22 (1), p.72-82
Hauptverfasser: Blondeel, Astrid, Demeyer, Heleen, Alcaraz-Serrano, Victoria, Buttery, Sara C, Buekers, Joren, Chynkiamis, Nikolaos, Josa-Culleré, Alícia, Delgado-Ortiz, Laura, Frei, Anja, Glorie, Lies, Gimeno-Santos, Elena, Hopkinson, Nick, Hume, Emily, Jansen, Carl-Philipp, Kirsten, Anne, Koch, Sarah, Megaritis, Dimitrios, Mellaerts, Paulien, Puhan, Milo A, Rochester, Lynn, Vogiatzis, Ioannis, Watz, Henrik, Wuyts, Marieke, Garcia-Aymerich, Judith, Troosters, Thierry
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND: Disability and loss of function are acknowledged as important problems for people living with COPD, but there is a need for validated tools to assess them. RESEARCH QUESTION: The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI) was originally validated for community-dwelling older adults. The full instrument has not been validated to assess disability and loss of function in people with COPD. METHODS: People with COPD from 6 European countries completed the LLFDI as part of an observational study. Its validity was assessed in terms of 1) levels and distribution of LLFDI domain and subdomain scores; 2) floor and ceiling effects; 3) instrument structure (3 domains, 7 subdomains) by confirmatory factor analysis; and 4) construct validity by (i) convergent validity, based on Spearman correlation with COPD-relevant and related constructs (functional exercise capacity, severity of dyspnea and COPD-related health status), and (ii) known-groups validity, based on the distribution of LLFDI scores according to COPD-meaningful groups (disease severity, age groups and use of a walking aid). RESULTS: The study included 605 participants (aged 68±8 years, 37% female, FEV1 54±20%pred.). Most had impaired disability and function levels. We observed no floor effects and a ceiling effect in only two subdomains. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a moderate model fit for all LLFDI domains. Most of the correlations met our hypotheses (73%), with moderate to strong correlations for function domain (r min-max 0.25-0.70), followed by disability-limitation domain (r min-max 0.15-0.54), and weakest correlations in the disability-frequency domain (r min-max 0.04-0.41). The disability-limitation and function domains differed by disease severity, age group and use of a walking aid. The disability-frequency domain differed by disease severity and use of a walking aid, but not by age groups. CONCLUSION: The LLFDI, a valid patient-reported outcome to investigate disability and function, has proven good construct validity in people with COPD.
ISSN:2329-6933