Validation of the King’s Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Prior, Thomas Skovhus; Hilberg, Ole; Shaker, Saher Burhan; Davidsen, Jesper Rømhild; Hoyer, Nils; Birring, Surinder S.; Bendstrup, Elisabeth

doi:10.1186/s12890-019-1018-0

Cited by 26 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(63 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result of measurement error on two measures, correlations between changes in scores are expected to be smaller. This may explain the generally weaker correlations in this longitudinal study compared to the cross-sectional studies on SGRQ-I and K-BILD [7][8][9][10]. DLCO showed the weakest associations to SGRQ-I and K-BILD in both analyses.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

“…Both methods indicated that SGRQ-I and K-BILD responded to changes in all HRQL and most physiological anchors; scores of the two instruments changed in concordance with changes in the anchors. The weaker correlations to physiological than to HRQL anchors were expected, as cross-sectional studies of K-BILD and SGRQ-I have shown similar results [7][8][9][10]. As a result of measurement error on two measures, correlations between changes in scores are expected to be smaller.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Exclusion was based on linguistic or intellectual barriers preventing completion of the questionnaires. Other studies on K-BILD and SGRQ-I have been based on the same cohort of patients with IPF [8,10].…”

Section: Study Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire (K-BILD) was developed as a HRQL instrument for patients with ILD [9] and has recently been validated in IPF [10]. Even though K-BILD is used in clinical trials [11,12], responsiveness and MCID have not yet been sufficiently determined [13,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of SGRQ-I and K-BILD in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) specific version of St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-I) and King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire (K-BILD) are validated health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments, but no or limited data exist on their responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The objectives of this study were to assess responsiveness of SGRQ-I and K-BILD and determine MCID separately for deterioration and improvement in a large, prospective cohort of patients with IPF in a real-world setting. Methods: Consecutive patients with IPF were recruited. SGRQ-I, K-BILD, SGRQ, Shortness of Breath Questionnaire, pulmonary function tests and 6-min walk test measurements were obtained at baseline and at six and 12 months; at six and 12 months, patients also completed Global Rating of Change Scales. Responsiveness was assessed using correlation coefficients and linear regression. Cox regression was used for mortality analyses. MCID was estimated using receiver operating characteristic curves with separate analyses for improvement and deterioration.Results: A total of 150 IPF patients were included and 124 completed the 12-month follow-up. Based on all HRQL anchors and most physiological anchors, responsiveness analyses supported the evidence pointing towards SGRQ-I and K-BILD as responsive instruments. Multivariate analyses showed an association between SGRQ-I and mortality (HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.36, p = 0.03) and a trend was found for K-BILD (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.05, p = 0.12). MCID was estimated for all domains of SGRQ-I and K-BILD. MCID for improvement differed from deterioration for both SGRQ-I Total (3.9 and 4.9) and K-BILD Total (4.7 and 2.7).Conclusions: SGRQ-I and K-BILD were responsive to change concerning both HRQL and most physiological anchors. MCID was determined separately for improvement and deterioration, resulting in different estimates; especially a smaller estimate for deterioration compared to improvement in K-BILD. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT02818712. Registered 30 June 2016.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Study Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of SGRQ-I and K-BILD in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The KBILD initially designed for ILD has shown tremendous promise for assessing HRQoL in IPF, especially in capturing disease-specific deficits. One of the advantages of this instrument is that it is simple enough to be used both in the research and clinical setting [177]. Validation studies have shown that the instrument demonstrates high internal consistency, good validity, good reliability and responsiveness [36,56,75,177] in the assessment of HRQoL of IPF patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health-related quality of life of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is one of the most common forms of interstitial lung disease presenting in persons 50 years and older. Through a comprehensive review of available studies, we aimed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people living with IPF and the instruments used in this assessment.Searches were conducted up to May, 2020. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed using pre-designed forms. Narrative synthesis approach was used to report results of the systematic review and a random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed, and a trim and fill method was used to assess publication bias.The review included 134 studies. The most used instruments to measure HRQoL were St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), Short Form 36 (SF36) and EuroQoL (EQ5D). Standardised mean scores (95% confidence interval) for these instruments were as follows: SGRQ total score: 44.72 (42.21–47.22); SF36 physical component score (PCS): 37.00 (34.74–39.26) SF36 mental component score (MCS): 50.18 (48.41–51.95); King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire total score: 58.38 (55.26–61.51); and EQ5D utility: 0.73 (0.68–0.79). Analysis of standardised means for both SGRQ and SF36 demonstrated worse scores in physical health domains as compared to mental health domains.This systematic review confirms that IPF negatively affected HRQoL, mostly impacting the physical health domains. This study also demonstrated that a diverse number of instruments are used to evaluate HRQoL. In view of this diversity, a standardised approach to measurement of HRQoL for IPF is important to ensure that comparisons made are reliable.

show abstract

Providing Patient-Centered Care in Interstitial Lung Disease

Wong

Danoff

2021

Clinics in Chest Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validation of the King’s Brief Interstitial Lung Disease questionnaire in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

Cited by 26 publications

References 32 publications

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of SGRQ-I and K-BILD in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of SGRQ-I and K-BILD in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

Health-related quality of life of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Providing Patient-Centered Care in Interstitial Lung Disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About