COPDMaPActNCT03042806
Validation of a Questionnaire for Physical Activity in COPD: Maugeri Physical Activity Questionnaire (MaPAct)
A study testing questionnaire in people with COPD, run by Elisabetta Zampogna at 1 site in Italy.
Trial summary
Patients affected from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation in terms of exercise capacity, symptoms and health-related quality of life whereas the effect on physical activity is still not clear. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 to 85 years
- Conditions the study is for
- COPD
- What is being tested?
- questionnaire
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 195 participants
- Where
- 1 siteItaly
- Study dates
- 2 Feb 2017to 2 Jul 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 40 to 85 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- COPD diagnosis in stable state, able to read and to write, that accept to sign informed consent
Who cannot join
- will be excluded all patients that were hospitalized in the 30 days before evaluation, patients with degenerative neuromuscular diseases, subjects with motor disabilities limiting deambulation, subjects with memory or comprehension problems, with dementia, parkinson disease, cognitive impairment, and subject that do not give their consent for the participation to the study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Italy1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
ICS Maugeri
Tradate, Va, 21049
Elisabetta Zampogna, MSc, +390331829599, elisabetta.zampogna@icsmaugeri.it
About this study
Official title: Validation of a Questionnaire Evaluating the Physical Activities in COPD Patients: the Maugeri Physical Activity Questionnaire - MaPAct
Patients affected from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation in terms of exercise capacity, symptoms and health-related quality of life whereas the effect on physical activity is still not clear. Some studies have investigated the effect of exercise training on daily physical activity. However, there is considerable variability in study findings, data are discordant and the effect of exercise training on physical activity is unclear. There are probably a number of reasons to account for this.
First of all, the choice of the method for evaluating physical activity. Although direct observation, double-labelled water and calorimetry are considered the gold standard for assessing physical activity, they are too time consuming and expensive to be used in large population studies .The Physical Activity (PA) of patients with COPD can be assessed using questionnaires. A variety of questionnaires exist that capture different aspects of physical activity such as amount, type, intensity, symptom experience and limitations in the performance of ''activities of daily life''. Up to now, it still does not exist an instrument that evaluates the physical activity of COPD patients in Italian language that takes in account Italian people' lifestyle. Since this is strongly influenced by the environment, cultural and social conditions in which we live, it is essential to have an instrument specifically tailored for the population under study.
Aim of this study is to validate the Maugeri Physical Activity questionnaire (MaPAct) in COPD patients pointing to assess self-perceived physical activity.
Read the detailed description
Methods The study will be approved by the Internal Review Board and Ethics Committee of the Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Institute of Care and Scientific Research Rehabilitation of Tradate and Lumezzane, Italy and Malcantonese Hospital, Castelrotto, Switzerland. The procedures will be performed between September 2016 to September 2018.
Study design A team of experts, (1 pulmonologist, 1 bioengineer, 4 physiotherapists, 1 psychologist and 1 psychometrist) elaborated the instruments and defined the instructions to administer the MaPAct to self-evaluate the physical activity during daily life. This phase distinguishes three steps.
Subjects A total of 195 in-hospital patients (15 in a first step, 50 in a second step and 130 in the third) with diagnosis of COPD, will be enrolled. Will be excluded from the study all the patients that were hospitalized in the 30 days before admission, patients with degenerative neuromuscular disease, subjects with motor disabilities limiting ambulation, subjects with memory or comprehension problems, with dementia, Parkinson disease, and subjects that do not give their consent to the participation to the study. All subjects receive a consent informed.
Step 1 A focus group of 15 patients will be arranged and patients will be asked to fill in the preliminary version of the questionnaire and to offer their impression. In this pilot step patients will be also asked to discuss on the relevance for the study population and comprehensiveness of the items describing them generically as 'clear' or 'unclear', "appropriate" or "not appropriate" to themselves (16-17), the aim being to achieve consensus for each item. Where items were described as "not appropriate" or "unclear", participants should explain their reasons. Some items should be removed at this stage, or reworded if necessary. The objective was to include all items judged to be relevant to COPD patients. These items will form the Item Set.
Step 2 The patient-perceived comprehensibility will be tested on a sample of 50 patients. Patients will be asked to rank their perceived comprehensibility of the questionnaire on a 4-point Likert scale, between 0 and 3 (0 =Easy, 1 =Quite easy, 2 = Quite difficult, and 3 = Difficult). Some items should be removed at this stage, or reworded if necessary.
Step 3 The definitive version of MaPAct will be administered to a sample of 130 patients to evaluate the psychometric properties of MaPAct.
A complete Rasch analysis will be performed, along with an evaluation of internal consistency and test-retest reliability in a sub-sample of subjects.
Finally, since skeletal muscle weakness, reduced exercise capacity, slow gait and reduced physical activity levels are well-known systemic effects in COPD, in order to estimate MaPAct criterion validity with COPD status, the correlations between MaPAct with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage (18), hospital admissions or exacerbations as defined by the GOLD and symptoms as derived by mMRC and CAT scales will be evaluated.
Time for completing the MaPAct will be also assessed. In order to provide an estimate of the reliability of the MaPAct to describe objective physical activity, in a sub group of 30 patients a metabolic holter (SenseWear armband - 48 hours) will be used to measure daily calories, number of steps and Metabolic Equivalents (METS) that will be correlated with the MapAct.
Timeline On day 1 of the study, all the COPD patients will perform medical evaluation (medical history, physical examination and history of COPD exacerbations within 12 month), pulmonary function tests, blood gas analysis and MaPAct. On the subsequent day, while 40 consecutive patients will complete again MaPAct (+ 24 h) for intrarater variability determination, all subjects will perform a 6-minute walking test (6MWT) and evaluate perceived exertion (CR-10; modified Borg Scale; 19). In all subjects modified Medical Research Council- (mMRC Dyspnea Index; 20, 21), and COPD Assessment Test (CAT, 22) will be carried on.
The GOLD spirometric classification will be used to determine the severity of the disease: mild COPD, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ≥80% predicted; moderate COPD, 50%≤FEV1<80% predicted; and severe-to-very severe COPD, FEV1<50% predicted.
Statistical analysis Internal consistency
The internal consistency of the MaPAct will be assessed by calculating:
- Cronbach's coefficient alpha: the closer this is to 1.0 the greater the internal consistency of the items in the scale. An alpha of 0.8 is a reasonable goal. Rules of thumb are: "Alpha > 0.9 Excellent; > 0.8 Good; > 0.7 Acceptable" (23);
- Item-remainder correlation through the Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient to examine the correlations between each item and the sum of the remaining items, omitting that item from the total: a Spearman coefficient ρ > 0.40 will be considered as the minimum value for satisfactory item-to-total correlation (24).
Reproducibility Reliability coefficient will be estimated with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Expecting to obtain ICC values of about .90, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of .20, at least 32 subjects are required (25).
Rasch Analysis For Rasch analysis, a sample size of more than 100 persons will estimate item difficulty with an alpha of 0.05 within ± 0.5 logits (26).
The steps of analysis will be as follows:
- Rating scale diagnostic. We will investigate whether the rating scale is being used in the expected manner. We evaluated the response categories as suggested by Linacre (27).
- Validity, assessed by evaluating the goodness of fit of the real data to the modelled data, to test if there were items that do not fit the model expectations. We will consider mean-square (MnSq) > 0.7 and < 1.3 as an indicator of acceptable fit (28). Items outside this range will be considered underacting (MnSq > 1.3, suggesting the presence of unexpectedly high variability), or overfitting (MnSq < 0.7, indicating a too predictable pattern).
- Reliability, evaluated in terms of separation, defined as the ratio of the person (or item) "true" standard deviation to the error standard deviation (29). Item separation is used to verify the item hierarchy and reflects the number of "strata" of measures that are statistically discernible. A separation of 2.0 is considered good and sufficient to allow stratification into 3 groups (30). A related index is the reliability of these separation indexes, which provides the degree of confidence that can be placed in the reproducibility of these estimates; the value of the coefficient varies from 0 to 1 (values > 0.80 are considered good, and > 0.90 excellent) (31).
- Principal component analysis (PCA) on the standardized residuals will be used to investigate:
4.1. The dimensionality of the scale. In this case "unidimensionality" assumes that, after the removal of the trait that the scale intended to measure (the "Rasch factor"), the residuals will be uncorrelated and normally distributed (i.e. there are no principal components). The following criteria will be used to determine whether additional factors are likely to be present in the residuals: at least 50% of the variance explained by the Rasch factor, eigenvalue of the first contrast smaller than 3, and variance explained by each contrast smaller than 5%.
4.2. The local independence of items. High correlation (> 0.30) of residuals for 2 items indicates that they may not be locally independent or that there is a subsidiary dimension in the measurement that is not accounted for by the main Rasch dimension (32).
Criterion validity Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient will be used to examine the correlations between the MaPAct and the COPD status as indicated by GOLD stage, CAT and mMRC scores. The effect size for the correlation is expected medium to high (r ~ 0.4). In order to detect departure from the hypothesis (i.e. small effect size, r <= .2), the sample size required is 130 subjects (alpha = 0.05, beta = 0.8, one sided test).
Comparison with Objective Physical Activity
Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient will be used to examine the correlations between the MaPAct and the daily calories, number of steps and METS as measured with the metabolic holter:
- Conditions
- COPD
- Being tested
- questionnaire
- Keywords
- Physical Activity, Questionnaire
- Medical subject headings
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Motor Activity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
questionnaireBehavioural
all the COPD patients will be ask to complete the questionnaire
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| experimental group | Other | COPD patients will be asked to fill in the Maugeri Physical Activity Questionnaire (MaPAct) to assess self perceived physical activity. Receives: Behavioral: questionnaire |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Questionnaire validity
Numeric score
Measured: six months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Questionnaire reliability
Numeric score
Measured: six months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Feb 2017 (estimated)
- Study start2 Feb 2017
- Primary completion7 Aug 2018
- Study completion2 Jul 2019 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for COPDStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 195 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Elisabetta Zampogna
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Elisabetta Zampogna, Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri
- Investigators
- Antonio Spanevello, professor, Study director, Insubria University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03042806
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ICSMaugeri
- Acronym
- MaPAct
- Status last verified
- Aug 2018
- First submitted
- 2 Feb 2017
- Last updated
- 8 Aug 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Spruit MA, Singh SJ, Garvey C, ZuWallack R, Nici L, Rochester C, Hill K, Holland AE, Lareau SC, Man WD, Pitta F, Sewell L, Raskin J, Bourbeau J, Crouch R, Franssen FM, Casaburi R, Vercoulen JH, Vogiatzis I, Gosselink R, Clini EM, Effing TW, Maltais F, van der Palen J, Troosters T, Janssen DJ, Collins E, Garcia-Aymerich J, Brooks D, Fahy BF, Puhan MA, Hoogendoorn M, Garrod R, Schols AM, Carlin B, Benzo R, Meek P, Morgan M, Rutten-van Molken MP, Ries AL, Make B, Goldstein RS, Dowson CA, Brozek JL, Donner CF, Wouters EF; ATS/ERS Task Force on Pulmonary Rehabilitation. An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: key concepts and advances in pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Oct 15;188(8):e13-64. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201309-1634ST.
PubMed 24127811Demeyer H, Burtin C, Van Remoortel H, Hornikx M, Langer D, Decramer M, Gosselink R, Janssens W, Troosters T. Standardizing the analysis of physical activity in patients with COPD following a pulmonary rehabilitation program. Chest. 2014 Aug;146(2):318-327. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1968.
PubMed 24603844Cindy Ng LW, Mackney J, Jenkins S, Hill K. Does exercise training change physical activity in people with COPD? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chron Respir Dis. 2012 Feb;9(1):17-26. doi: 10.1177/1479972311430335. Epub 2011 Dec 22.
PubMed 22194629Pitta F, Troosters T, Probst VS, Spruit MA, Decramer M, Gosselink R. Quantifying physical activity in daily life with questionnaires and motion sensors in COPD. Eur Respir J. 2006 May;27(5):1040-55. doi: 10.1183/09031936.06.00064105.
PubMed 16707399Dobbels F, de Jong C, Drost E, Elberse J, Feridou C, Jacobs L, Rabinovich R, Frei A, Puhan MA, de Boer WI, van der Molen T, Williams K, Pinnock H, Troosters T, Karlsson N, Kulich K, Rudell K; PROactive consortium; PROactive consortium. The PROactive innovative conceptual framework on physical activity. Eur Respir J. 2014 Nov;44(5):1223-33. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00004814. Epub 2014 Jul 17.
PubMed 25034563
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Aug 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Validation of a Questionnaire Evaluating the Physical Activities in COPD Patients: the Maugeri Physical Activity Questionnaire - MaPAct
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03042806
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MaPAct / ICSMaugeri
- Conditions
- COPD
- Keywords
- Physical Activity, Questionnaire
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 195 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Elisabetta ZampognaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri
- Study start
- 2 Feb 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 7 Aug 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Jul 2019 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Feb 2017 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Patients affected from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation in terms of exercise capacity, symptoms and health-related quality of life whereas the effect on physical activity is still not clear. Some studies have investigated the effect of exercise training on daily physical activity. However, there is considerable variability in study findings, data are discordant and the effect of exercise training on physical activity is unclear. There are probably a number of reasons to account for this.
First of all, the choice of the method for evaluating physical activity. Although direct observation, double-labelled water and calorimetry are considered the gold standard for assessing physical activity, they are too time consuming and expensive to be used in large population studies .The Physical Activity (PA) of patients with COPD can be assessed using questionnaires. A variety of questionnaires exist that capture different aspects of physical activity such as amount, type, intensity, symptom experience and limitations in the performance of ''activities of daily life''. Up to now, it still does not exist an instrument that evaluates the physical activity of COPD patients in Italian language that takes in account Italian people' lifestyle. Since this is strongly influenced by the environment, cultural and social conditions in which we live, it is essential to have an instrument specifically tailored for the population under study.
Aim of this study is to validate the Maugeri Physical Activity questionnaire (MaPAct) in COPD patients pointing to assess self-perceived physical activity.
Detailed description
Methods The study will be approved by the Internal Review Board and Ethics Committee of the Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Institute of Care and Scientific Research Rehabilitation of Tradate and Lumezzane, Italy and Malcantonese Hospital, Castelrotto, Switzerland. The procedures will be performed between September 2016 to September 2018.
Study design A team of experts, (1 pulmonologist, 1 bioengineer, 4 physiotherapists, 1 psychologist and 1 psychometrist) elaborated the instruments and defined the instructions to administer the MaPAct to self-evaluate the physical activity during daily life. This phase distinguishes three steps.
Subjects A total of 195 in-hospital patients (15 in a first step, 50 in a second step and 130 in the third) with diagnosis of COPD, will be enrolled. Will be excluded from the study all the patients that were hospitalized in the 30 days before admission, patients with degenerative neuromuscular disease, subjects with motor disabilities limiting ambulation, subjects with memory or comprehension problems, with dementia, Parkinson disease, and subjects that do not give their consent to the participation to the study. All subjects receive a consent informed.
Step 1 A focus group of 15 patients will be arranged and patients will be asked to fill in the preliminary version of the questionnaire and to offer their impression. In this pilot step patients will be also asked to discuss on the relevance for the study population and comprehensiveness of the items describing them generically as 'clear' or 'unclear', "appropriate" or "not appropriate" to themselves (16-17), the aim being to achieve consensus for each item. Where items were described as "not appropriate" or "unclear", participants should explain their reasons. Some items should be removed at this stage, or reworded if necessary. The objective was to include all items judged to be relevant to COPD patients. These items will form the Item Set.
Step 2 The patient-perceived comprehensibility will be tested on a sample of 50 patients. Patients will be asked to rank their perceived comprehensibility of the questionnaire on a 4-point Likert scale, between 0 and 3 (0 =Easy, 1 =Quite easy, 2 = Quite difficult, and 3 = Difficult). Some items should be removed at this stage, or reworded if necessary.
Step 3 The definitive version of MaPAct will be administered to a sample of 130 patients to evaluate the psychometric properties of MaPAct.
A complete Rasch analysis will be performed, along with an evaluation of internal consistency and test-retest reliability in a sub-sample of subjects.
Finally, since skeletal muscle weakness, reduced exercise capacity, slow gait and reduced physical activity levels are well-known systemic effects in COPD, in order to estimate MaPAct criterion validity with COPD status, the correlations between MaPAct with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) stage (18), hospital admissions or exacerbations as defined by the GOLD and symptoms as derived by mMRC and CAT scales will be evaluated.
Time for completing the MaPAct will be also assessed. In order to provide an estimate of the reliability of the MaPAct to describe objective physical activity, in a sub group of 30 patients a metabolic holter (SenseWear armband - 48 hours) will be used to measure daily calories, number of steps and Metabolic Equivalents (METS) that will be correlated with the MapAct.
Timeline On day 1 of the study, all the COPD patients will perform medical evaluation (medical history, physical examination and history of COPD exacerbations within 12 month), pulmonary function tests, blood gas analysis and MaPAct. On the subsequent day, while 40 consecutive patients will complete again MaPAct (+ 24 h) for intrarater variability determination, all subjects will perform a 6-minute walking test (6MWT) and evaluate perceived exertion (CR-10; modified Borg Scale; 19). In all subjects modified Medical Research Council- (mMRC Dyspnea Index; 20, 21), and COPD Assessment Test (CAT, 22) will be carried on.
The GOLD spirometric classification will be used to determine the severity of the disease: mild COPD, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ≥80% predicted; moderate COPD, 50%≤FEV1<80% predicted; and severe-to-very severe COPD, FEV1<50% predicted.
Statistical analysis Internal consistency
The internal consistency of the MaPAct will be assessed by calculating:
- Cronbach's coefficient alpha: the closer this is to 1.0 the greater the internal consistency of the items in the scale. An alpha of 0.8 is a reasonable goal. Rules of thumb are: "Alpha > 0.9 Excellent; > 0.8 Good; > 0.7 Acceptable" (23);
- Item-remainder correlation through the Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient to examine the correlations between each item and the sum of the remaining items, omitting that item from the total: a Spearman coefficient ρ > 0.40 will be considered as the minimum value for satisfactory item-to-total correlation (24).
Reproducibility Reliability coefficient will be estimated with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Expecting to obtain ICC values of about .90, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of .20, at least 32 subjects are required (25).
Rasch Analysis For Rasch analysis, a sample size of more than 100 persons will estimate item difficulty with an alpha of 0.05 within ± 0.5 logits (26).
The steps of analysis will be as follows:
- Rating scale diagnostic. We will investigate whether the rating scale is being used in the expected manner. We evaluated the response categories as suggested by Linacre (27).
- Validity, assessed by evaluating the goodness of fit of the real data to the modelled data, to test if there were items that do not fit the model expectations. We will consider mean-square (MnSq) > 0.7 and < 1.3 as an indicator of acceptable fit (28). Items outside this range will be considered underacting (MnSq > 1.3, suggesting the presence of unexpectedly high variability), or overfitting (MnSq < 0.7, indicating a too predictable pattern).
- Reliability, evaluated in terms of separation, defined as the ratio of the person (or item) "true" standard deviation to the error standard deviation (29). Item separation is used to verify the item hierarchy and reflects the number of "strata" of measures that are statistically discernible. A separation of 2.0 is considered good and sufficient to allow stratification into 3 groups (30). A related index is the reliability of these separation indexes, which provides the degree of confidence that can be placed in the reproducibility of these estimates; the value of the coefficient varies from 0 to 1 (values > 0.80 are considered good, and > 0.90 excellent) (31).
- Principal component analysis (PCA) on the standardized residuals will be used to investigate:
4.1. The dimensionality of the scale. In this case "unidimensionality" assumes that, after the removal of the trait that the scale intended to measure (the "Rasch factor"), the residuals will be uncorrelated and normally distributed (i.e. there are no principal components). The following criteria will be used to determine whether additional factors are likely to be present in the residuals: at least 50% of the variance explained by the Rasch factor, eigenvalue of the first contrast smaller than 3, and variance explained by each contrast smaller than 5%.
4.2. The local independence of items. High correlation (> 0.30) of residuals for 2 items indicates that they may not be locally independent or that there is a subsidiary dimension in the measurement that is not accounted for by the main Rasch dimension (32).
Criterion validity Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient will be used to examine the correlations between the MaPAct and the COPD status as indicated by GOLD stage, CAT and mMRC scores. The effect size for the correlation is expected medium to high (r ~ 0.4). In order to detect departure from the hypothesis (i.e. small effect size, r <= .2), the sample size required is 130 subjects (alpha = 0.05, beta = 0.8, one sided test).
Comparison with Objective Physical Activity
Spearman's rank correlation (ρ) coefficient will be used to examine the correlations between the MaPAct and the daily calories, number of steps and METS as measured with the metabolic holter:
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| experimental group | Other | Behavioral: questionnaireCOPD patients will be asked to fill in the Maugeri Physical Activity Questionnaire (MaPAct) to assess self perceived physical activity. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- COPD diagnosis in stable state, able to read and to write, that accept to sign informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- will be excluded all patients that were hospitalized in the 30 days before evaluation, patients with degenerative neuromuscular diseases, subjects with motor disabilities limiting deambulation, subjects with memory or comprehension problems, with dementia, parkinson disease, cognitive impairment, and subject that do not give their consent for the participation to the study
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| questionnaireall the COPD patients will be ask to complete the questionnaire | Behavioural | experimental group |
Primary outcome
Questionnaire validity
Time frame: six months
Numeric score
1 secondary outcome
Questionnaire reliability
Time frame: six months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Aug 2018.
- Background: PubMed 24127811Spruit MA, Singh SJ, Garvey C, ZuWallack R, Nici L, Rochester C, Hill K, Holland AE, Lareau SC, Man WD, Pitta F, Sewell L, Raskin J, Bourbeau J, Crouch R, Franssen FM, Casaburi R, Vercoulen JH, Vogiatzis I, Gosselink R, Clini EM, Effing TW, Maltais F, van der Palen J, Troosters T, Janssen DJ, Collins E, Garcia-Aymerich J, Brooks D, Fahy BF, Puhan MA, Hoogendoorn M, Garrod R, Schols AM, Carlin B, Benzo R, Meek P, Morgan M, Rutten-van Molken MP, Ries AL, Make B, Goldstein RS, Dowson CA, Brozek JL, Donner CF, Wouters EF; ATS/ERS Task Force on Pulmonary Rehabilitation. An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: key concepts and advances in pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Oct 15;188(8):e13-64. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201309-1634ST.
- Background: PubMed 24603844Demeyer H, Burtin C, Van Remoortel H, Hornikx M, Langer D, Decramer M, Gosselink R, Janssens W, Troosters T. Standardizing the analysis of physical activity in patients with COPD following a pulmonary rehabilitation program. Chest. 2014 Aug;146(2):318-327. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1968.
- Background: PubMed 22194629Cindy Ng LW, Mackney J, Jenkins S, Hill K. Does exercise training change physical activity in people with COPD? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chron Respir Dis. 2012 Feb;9(1):17-26. doi: 10.1177/1479972311430335. Epub 2011 Dec 22.
- Background: PubMed 16707399Pitta F, Troosters T, Probst VS, Spruit MA, Decramer M, Gosselink R. Quantifying physical activity in daily life with questionnaires and motion sensors in COPD. Eur Respir J. 2006 May;27(5):1040-55. doi: 10.1183/09031936.06.00064105.
- Background: PubMed 25034563Dobbels F, de Jong C, Drost E, Elberse J, Feridou C, Jacobs L, Rabinovich R, Frei A, Puhan MA, de Boer WI, van der Molen T, Williams K, Pinnock H, Troosters T, Karlsson N, Kulich K, Rudell K; PROactive consortium; PROactive consortium. The PROactive innovative conceptual framework on physical activity. Eur Respir J. 2014 Nov;44(5):1223-33. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00004814. Epub 2014 Jul 17.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for COPD
Active, not recruiting
Symptoms and Functions in Patients With COPD and Chronic Bronchitis Switching From CIG to THS
COPD, Smoking
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
An Open-Label Extension Study to Evaluate Inhaled Treprostinil SMI in Participants With Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (PH-COPD)
Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Not yet recruiting
The Aim of the Study is to Decipher the Alterations in Signalling Pathways of Skeletal Muscle Stem Cells (Satellite Cells (SCs)) in Individuals With COPD, as Well as to Examine the Effect of Exercise Training on SCs.
COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), Sarcopenia in Elderly
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Study of Treprostinil Administered Via Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) in Participants With Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (PH-COPD)
Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study for GSK3862995B in Healthy Participants and Participants With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Antonio Spanevello, professor study director
Insubria University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing questionnaire in people with COPD, run by Elisabetta Zampogna at 1 site in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Elisabetta Zampogna, MSc (+390331829599, elisabetta.zampogna@icsmaugeri.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Questionnaire validity (time frame: six months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03042806, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Aug 2018.