Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29222436›Full record

Observational studyNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2017

Weekly self-measurement of FEV1 and PEF and its impact on ACQ (asthma control questionnaire)-scores: 12-week observational study with 76 patients.

Christoph Ulrich Werner, Klaus Linde, Julia Schäffner, Constanze Storr, Antonius Schneider

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Christoph Ulrich WernerTechnical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice, Munich, Germany. christoph.werner@mri.tum.de.
Klaus LindeTechnical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice, Munich, Germany.
Julia SchäffnerTechnical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice, Munich, Germany.
Constanze StorrTechnical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice, Munich, Germany.
Antonius SchneiderTechnical University of Munich, TUM School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "Asthma Control Questionnaire" (ACQ) is a very common questionnaire for assessing asthma control. This study compares different ACQ versions in a self-monitoring program over a 12-week period combining them with patients' self-measurements of peak expiratory flow (PEF) and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). The objective was to test the feasibility of FEV1-self-measurements and to compare ACQ versions regarding possible additional information given by lung function. In this prospective multicenter observational study 100 adult asthma patients, recruited at six family practices and two pulmologists' private practices in Germany, completed the ACQ weekly, performing self-measurements of PEF and FEV1. Seventy-six patients were included into final analysis with only 3% missing values. Scores for all ACQ versions improved significantly (all P-values < 0.05) with reductions of 32% for ACQ5, 31% for ACQ6, 22% for ACQ7-FEV1, and 21% for ACQ7-PEF with high Pearson's correlation coefficients of all scores (r between 0.96 and 0.99). ACQ7-FEV1 scores were significantly higher than others. Separated courses of lung function parameters showed nearly no change, but ACQ5 and ACQ6 as scores for symptoms and reliever medication improved constantly. ACQ5 and ACQ6 revealed higher percentages of patients classified as "controlled" than ACQ7-scores. In conclusion, with only a few missing data points, our results suggest feasibility of FEV1-self-measurements. Courses of symptom-related and lung function-related ACQ items differ clearly. Our results support the GINA recommendations to consider symptoms and lung function separately. FEV1-self-measurements for research purposes may be included with the ACQ, but in clinical practice seem to measure a different domain to symptomatic asthma control.

Indexed as

Self ReportAsthmaBronchodilator AgentsFeasibility StudiesFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNebulizers and VaporizersPeak Expiratory Flow RateProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesBronchodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID29222436
PMCPMC5722863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.