Open AccessDevelopment and Validity Assessment of a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Knowledge Questionnaire in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Author(s) -
Nicole Robertson,
Trishul Siddharthan,
Suzanne L. Pollard,
Patricia Alupo,
Oscar Flores-Flores,
Natalie A. Rykiel,
E Romani,
Ivonne Ascencio-Días,
Bruce Kirenga,
William Checkley,
John R. Hurst,
Shumonta Quaderi,
GECo Study Investigators
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
annals of the american thoracic society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.035
H-Index - 114
eISSN - 2329-6933
pISSN - 2325-6621
DOI - 10.1513/annalsats.202007-884oc
Subject(s) - medicine , copd , focus group , pulmonary disease , family medicine , disease , health care , physical therapy , pathology , marketing , economics , business , economic growth
Rationale: The majority of the morbidity and mortality related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite the increasing burden of COPD, disease-specific knowledge among healthcare workers and patients in LMICs remains limited. COPD knowledge questionnaires (COPD-KQ) are valid and reliable tools to assess COPD knowledge and can be employed in settings with limited health literacy. Objectives: To develop and assess the validity and reliability of a COPD-KQ among individuals with COPD in three LMIC settings. Methods: Twelve questions were generated by an expert team of 16 researchers, physicians, and public health professionals to create an LMIC-specific COPD-KQ. The content was based on previous instruments, clinical guidelines, focus-group discussions, and questionnaire piloting. Participants with COPD completed the questionnaire across three diverse LMIC settings before and 3 months after delivery of a standardized COPD-specific education package by a local community health worker trained to deliver the education to an appropriate standard. We used paired t tests to assess improvement in knowledge after intervention. Results: Questionnaire development initially yielded 52 items. On the basis of community feedback and expertise, items were eliminated and added, yielding a final 12-item questionnaire, with a maximum total score of 12. A total of 196 participants with COPD were included in this study in Nepal ( n = 86), Peru ( n = 35), and Uganda ( n = 75). The mean ± standard deviation baseline score was 8.0 ± 2.5, and 3 months after education, the mean score was 10.2 ± 1.7. The community health worker-led COPD educational intervention improved COPD knowledge among community members by 2.2 points (95% confidence interval, 1.8-2.6 points; t = 10.9; P < 0.001). Internal consistency using Cronbach's α was 0.75. Conclusions: The LMIC COPD-KQ demonstrates face and content validity and acceptable internal consistency through development phases, suggesting a reliable and valid COPD education instrument that can be used to assess educational interventions across LMIC settings. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03365713).