How to evaluate exertional breathlessness using normative reference equations in research.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Magnus Ekström, Hayley Lewthwaite, Dennis Jensen
{"title":"How to evaluate exertional breathlessness using normative reference equations in research.","authors":"Magnus Ekström, Hayley Lewthwaite, Dennis Jensen","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Breathlessness is a common, distressing and limiting symptom in people with advanced disease, but is challenging to assess as the symptom intensity depends on the level of exertion (symptom stimulus) during the assessment. This review outlines how to use recently developed normative reference equations to evaluate breathlessness responses, accounting for level of exertion, for valid assessment in symptom research.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Published normative reference equations are freely available to predict the breathlessness intensity response (on a 0-10 Borg scale) among healthy people after a 6-minute walking test (6MWT) or an incremental cycle cardiopulmonary exercise test (iCPET). The predicted normal values account for individual characteristics (including age, sex, height, and body mass) and level of exertion (walk distance for 6MWT; power output, oxygen uptake, or minute ventilation at any point during the iCPET). The equations can be used to (1) construct a matched healthy control dataset for a study; (2) determine how abnormal an individual's exertional breathlessness is compared with healthy controls; (3) identify abnormal exertional breathlessness (rating > upper limit of normal); and (4) validly compare exertional breathlessness levels across individuals and groups.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Methods for standardized and valid assessment of exertional breathlessness have emerged for improved symptoms research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48837,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","volume":"18 4","pages":"191-198"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000721","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Breathlessness is a common, distressing and limiting symptom in people with advanced disease, but is challenging to assess as the symptom intensity depends on the level of exertion (symptom stimulus) during the assessment. This review outlines how to use recently developed normative reference equations to evaluate breathlessness responses, accounting for level of exertion, for valid assessment in symptom research.

Recent findings: Published normative reference equations are freely available to predict the breathlessness intensity response (on a 0-10 Borg scale) among healthy people after a 6-minute walking test (6MWT) or an incremental cycle cardiopulmonary exercise test (iCPET). The predicted normal values account for individual characteristics (including age, sex, height, and body mass) and level of exertion (walk distance for 6MWT; power output, oxygen uptake, or minute ventilation at any point during the iCPET). The equations can be used to (1) construct a matched healthy control dataset for a study; (2) determine how abnormal an individual's exertional breathlessness is compared with healthy controls; (3) identify abnormal exertional breathlessness (rating > upper limit of normal); and (4) validly compare exertional breathlessness levels across individuals and groups.

Summary: Methods for standardized and valid assessment of exertional breathlessness have emerged for improved symptoms research.

如何在研究中使用常模参考方程评估用力呼吸困难。
审查目的:呼吸困难是晚期疾病患者的一种常见、痛苦和限制性症状,但由于症状强度取决于评估过程中的用力程度(症状刺激),因此评估难度很大。本综述概述了如何使用最近开发的常模参考方程来评估呼吸困难反应,同时考虑用力程度,以便在症状研究中进行有效评估:已出版的常模参考方程可免费用于预测健康人在进行 6 分钟步行测试 (6MWT) 或增量循环心肺运动测试 (iCPET) 后的憋气强度反应(按 0-10 Borg 量表)。预测的正常值考虑了个人特征(包括年龄、性别、身高和体重)和用力程度(6MWT 的步行距离;iCPET 中任意点的输出功率、摄氧量或分钟通气量)。这些方程可用于:(1)为一项研究构建一个匹配的健康对照数据集;(2)确定与健康对照相比,个体的用力呼吸异常程度;(3)识别异常用力呼吸(评级>正常上限);以及(4)有效比较不同个体和群体的用力呼吸水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: A reader-friendly resource, Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care provides an up-to-date account of the most important advances in the field of supportive and palliative care. Each issue contains either two or three sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive coverage of all the key issues, including end-of-life management, gastrointestinal systems and respiratory problems. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信