Assessing coughing and wheezing in lung cancer: a pilot study.

Cynthia C Chernecky, Linda Sarna, Jennifer L Waller, Mary Lynn Brecht

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To establish reliability and validity of two self-report questionnaires, the Lung Cancer Cough Questionnaire and the Lung Cancer Wheezing Questionnaire. DESIGN: Prospective, exploratory pilot study. SETTING: Clinical oncology settings in the southern United States. SAMPLE: 31 adult women with lung cancer. METHODS: Content validity of both questionnaires was assessed through a comprehensive literature review and an expert judge panel. Concurrent validity was established by Spearman rank correlation coefficients and Wil-coxon Rank Sum tests with items from other valid tools. Test-retest reliability was assessed by percent agreement, kappa, paired t tests, and correlations. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Cough, wheeze. FINDINGS: Cronbach's alpha showed excellent internal consistency and percent agreement, and kappa showed similarity of item responses across test-retest administrations. Nonsignificant paired t tests indicated similar mean scores, and significant test-retest correlations supported test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary testing indicates good reliability and validity for both questionnaires. Both instruments can identify people with problems of coughing and wheezing and have the potential for monitoring these symptoms over time and determining effectiveness of interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Assessment of coughing and wheezing is an important component of monitoring respiratory symptoms of lung cancer. Both of these symptoms can be amenable to interventions. Further research is needed to confirm psychometrics and sensitivity of these tools.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1095-1101
Number of pages7
JournalOncology nursing forum
Volume31
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2004

Fingerprint

Respiratory Sounds
Lung Neoplasms
Reproducibility of Results
Nonparametric Statistics
Cough
Medical Oncology
Psychometrics
Self Report
Surveys and Questionnaires
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology(nursing)

Cite this

Assessing coughing and wheezing in lung cancer : a pilot study. / Chernecky, Cynthia C; Sarna, Linda; Waller, Jennifer L; Brecht, Mary Lynn.

In: Oncology nursing forum, Vol. 31, No. 6, 01.01.2004, p. 1095-1101.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d260b66d5ad44719803251d6e10666d9,
title = "Assessing coughing and wheezing in lung cancer: a pilot study.",
abstract = "PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To establish reliability and validity of two self-report questionnaires, the Lung Cancer Cough Questionnaire and the Lung Cancer Wheezing Questionnaire. DESIGN: Prospective, exploratory pilot study. SETTING: Clinical oncology settings in the southern United States. SAMPLE: 31 adult women with lung cancer. METHODS: Content validity of both questionnaires was assessed through a comprehensive literature review and an expert judge panel. Concurrent validity was established by Spearman rank correlation coefficients and Wil-coxon Rank Sum tests with items from other valid tools. Test-retest reliability was assessed by percent agreement, kappa, paired t tests, and correlations. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Cough, wheeze. FINDINGS: Cronbach's alpha showed excellent internal consistency and percent agreement, and kappa showed similarity of item responses across test-retest administrations. Nonsignificant paired t tests indicated similar mean scores, and significant test-retest correlations supported test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary testing indicates good reliability and validity for both questionnaires. Both instruments can identify people with problems of coughing and wheezing and have the potential for monitoring these symptoms over time and determining effectiveness of interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Assessment of coughing and wheezing is an important component of monitoring respiratory symptoms of lung cancer. Both of these symptoms can be amenable to interventions. Further research is needed to confirm psychometrics and sensitivity of these tools.",
author = "Chernecky, {Cynthia C} and Linda Sarna and Waller, {Jennifer L} and Brecht, {Mary Lynn}",
year = "2004",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1188/04.ONF.1095-1101",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "1095--1101",
journal = "Oncology Nursing Forum",
issn = "0190-535X",
publisher = "Oncology Nursing Society",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing coughing and wheezing in lung cancer

T2 - a pilot study.

AU - Chernecky, Cynthia C

AU - Sarna, Linda

AU - Waller, Jennifer L

AU - Brecht, Mary Lynn

PY - 2004/1/1

Y1 - 2004/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To establish reliability and validity of two self-report questionnaires, the Lung Cancer Cough Questionnaire and the Lung Cancer Wheezing Questionnaire. DESIGN: Prospective, exploratory pilot study. SETTING: Clinical oncology settings in the southern United States. SAMPLE: 31 adult women with lung cancer. METHODS: Content validity of both questionnaires was assessed through a comprehensive literature review and an expert judge panel. Concurrent validity was established by Spearman rank correlation coefficients and Wil-coxon Rank Sum tests with items from other valid tools. Test-retest reliability was assessed by percent agreement, kappa, paired t tests, and correlations. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Cough, wheeze. FINDINGS: Cronbach's alpha showed excellent internal consistency and percent agreement, and kappa showed similarity of item responses across test-retest administrations. Nonsignificant paired t tests indicated similar mean scores, and significant test-retest correlations supported test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary testing indicates good reliability and validity for both questionnaires. Both instruments can identify people with problems of coughing and wheezing and have the potential for monitoring these symptoms over time and determining effectiveness of interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Assessment of coughing and wheezing is an important component of monitoring respiratory symptoms of lung cancer. Both of these symptoms can be amenable to interventions. Further research is needed to confirm psychometrics and sensitivity of these tools.

AB - PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To establish reliability and validity of two self-report questionnaires, the Lung Cancer Cough Questionnaire and the Lung Cancer Wheezing Questionnaire. DESIGN: Prospective, exploratory pilot study. SETTING: Clinical oncology settings in the southern United States. SAMPLE: 31 adult women with lung cancer. METHODS: Content validity of both questionnaires was assessed through a comprehensive literature review and an expert judge panel. Concurrent validity was established by Spearman rank correlation coefficients and Wil-coxon Rank Sum tests with items from other valid tools. Test-retest reliability was assessed by percent agreement, kappa, paired t tests, and correlations. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Cough, wheeze. FINDINGS: Cronbach's alpha showed excellent internal consistency and percent agreement, and kappa showed similarity of item responses across test-retest administrations. Nonsignificant paired t tests indicated similar mean scores, and significant test-retest correlations supported test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary testing indicates good reliability and validity for both questionnaires. Both instruments can identify people with problems of coughing and wheezing and have the potential for monitoring these symptoms over time and determining effectiveness of interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Assessment of coughing and wheezing is an important component of monitoring respiratory symptoms of lung cancer. Both of these symptoms can be amenable to interventions. Further research is needed to confirm psychometrics and sensitivity of these tools.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32944461901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32944461901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1188/04.ONF.1095-1101

DO - 10.1188/04.ONF.1095-1101

M3 - Article

C2 - 15547632

AN - SCOPUS:32944461901

VL - 31

SP - 1095

EP - 1101

JO - Oncology Nursing Forum

JF - Oncology Nursing Forum

SN - 0190-535X

IS - 6

ER -