Development of a Barthel Index based on dyspnea for patients with respiratory diseases
Authors Vitacca M, Paneroni M, Baiardi P, De Carolis V, Zampogna E, Belli S, Carone M, Spanevello A, Balbi B, Bertolotti G
Received 16 January 2016
Accepted for publication 7 March 2016
Published 7 June 2016 Volume 2016:11(1) Pages 1199—1206
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Lucy Goodman
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Russell
Michele Vitacca,1 Mara Paneroni,1 Paola Baiardi,2 Vito De Carolis,3 Elisabetta Zampogna,4 Stefano Belli,5 Mauro Carone,3 Antonio Spanevello,4,6 Bruno Balbi,5 Giorgio Bertolotti7
1Respiratory Rehabilitation Division, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Lumezzane, Brescia, 2Scientific Direction, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Pavia, Pavia, 3Respiratory Division, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Cassano delle Murge, Bari, 4Respiratory Division, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Tradate, Varese, 5Respiratory Division, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Veruno, Novara, 6Respiratory Diseases Unit, University of Insubria, Varese, 7Psychology Unit, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Institute of Tradate, Varese, Italy
Background: As Barthel Index (BI) quantifies motor impairment but not breathlessness, the use of only this index could underestimate disability in chronic respiratory disease (CRD). To our knowledge, no study evaluates both motor and respiratory disability in CRD during activities of daily living (ADLs) simultaneously and with a unique tool. The objective of this study was to propose for patients with CRD an additional tool for dyspnea assessment during ADLs based on BI items named Barthel Index dyspnea.
Methods: Comprehensibility, reliability, internal consistency, validity, responsiveness, and ability to differentiate between disease groups were assessed on 219 subjects through an observational study performed in an in-hospital rehabilitation setting.
Results: Good comprehensibility, high reliability (interrater intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.93 [95% confidence interval 0.892–0.964] and test–retest intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.99 [95% confidence interval 0.983–0.994]), good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.89), strong concurrent validity with 6 minute walking distance (Pearson r=–0.538, P<0.001) and Medical Research Council (Spearman rS=0.70, P<0.001), good responsiveness after rehabilitation (P<0.001), and good appropriateness of the index were found evidencing patients with different dyspnea severity. Divergent validity showed weak correlation (Pearson r=–0.38) comparing Barthel Index dyspnea and BI.
Conclusion: The BI based on dyspnea perception proved to be reliable, sensitive, and adequate as a tool for measuring the level of dyspnea perceived in performing basic daily living activities. A unique instrument simultaneously administered may provide a global assessment of disability during ADLs incorporating both motor and respiratory aspects.
Keywords: activities of daily living, psychometric tests, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary rehabilitation
A Letter to the Editor has been received and published for this article.
A further Letter to the Editor has been received and published for this article
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]