Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT)

on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and objective: A cough-specific quality-of-life questionnaire is recommended to assess the impact of cough; however, a simple instrument to quantify cough is required for everyday clinical practice. This study was aimed to develop a short patient-completed questionnaire (COugh Assessment Test, COAT). Methods: The COAT was developed and validated by comparison with the Korean version of Leicester Cough Questionnaire (K-LCQ) and cough numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10, 11-point scale) for chronic cough patients. Results: Item selection identified five items regarding cough frequency, daily activity, sleep disturbance, fatigue and cough hypersensitivity (0–4 scaling of items, 0–20 score range) through reliability test cohort (n = 78). Test–retest reliability was strong (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.88). The final COAT was compared with K-LCQ and cough NRS in a validation cohort (n = 323). In Rasch analysis, COAT fitted well to a unidimensional model. Pearson correlations of COAT versus K-LCQ (i) before treatment, (ii) after treatment; COAT versus cough NRS (iii) before treatment, (iv) after treatment; (v) delta-COAT versus delta-cough NRS, (vi) delta-COAT versus delta-K-LCQ were (i) −0.71, (ii) −0.81, (iii) 0.69, (iv) 0.82, (v) −0.66 and (vi) 0.72, respectively. Conclusion: The COAT is a useful, simple questionnaire for assessing and monitoring cough.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)551-557
Number of pages7
JournalRespirology
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Cough

Keywords

  • cough
  • questionnaire
  • reliability
  • severity
  • validity

Cite this

on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases (2019). Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT). Respirology, 24(6), 551-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.13462
on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases. / Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT). In: Respirology. 2019 ; Vol. 24, No. 6. pp. 551-557.
@article{a93d84d7c53d4a769b846fbec8dc92e4,
title = "Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT)",
abstract = "Background and objective: A cough-specific quality-of-life questionnaire is recommended to assess the impact of cough; however, a simple instrument to quantify cough is required for everyday clinical practice. This study was aimed to develop a short patient-completed questionnaire (COugh Assessment Test, COAT). Methods: The COAT was developed and validated by comparison with the Korean version of Leicester Cough Questionnaire (K-LCQ) and cough numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10, 11-point scale) for chronic cough patients. Results: Item selection identified five items regarding cough frequency, daily activity, sleep disturbance, fatigue and cough hypersensitivity (0–4 scaling of items, 0–20 score range) through reliability test cohort (n = 78). Test–retest reliability was strong (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.88). The final COAT was compared with K-LCQ and cough NRS in a validation cohort (n = 323). In Rasch analysis, COAT fitted well to a unidimensional model. Pearson correlations of COAT versus K-LCQ (i) before treatment, (ii) after treatment; COAT versus cough NRS (iii) before treatment, (iv) after treatment; (v) delta-COAT versus delta-cough NRS, (vi) delta-COAT versus delta-K-LCQ were (i) −0.71, (ii) −0.81, (iii) 0.69, (iv) 0.82, (v) −0.66 and (vi) 0.72, respectively. Conclusion: The COAT is a useful, simple questionnaire for assessing and monitoring cough.",
keywords = "cough, questionnaire, reliability, severity, validity",
author = "{on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases} and Koo, {Hyeon Kyoung} and Ina Jeong and Kim, {Joo Hee} and Kim, {Sung Kyoung} and Shin, {Jong Wook} and Park, {So Young} and Rhee, {Chin Kook} and Choi, {Eun Young} and Moon, {Ji Yong} and Kim, {Yee Hyung} and Hyun Lee and Kang, {Hye Seon} and Min, {Kyung Hoon} and Kim, {Jin Woo} and Kim, {Je Hyeong} and Lee, {Sang Haak} and Yoo, {Kwang Ha} and Kim, {Deog Kyeom} and Yoon, {Hyoung Kyu} and Kim, {Dong Gyu} and Kim, {Hui Jung} and Jung, {Ki Suck} and Kim, {Deog Kyeom}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/resp.13462",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "551--557",
journal = "Respirology",
issn = "1323-7799",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",
number = "6",

}

on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases 2019, 'Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT)', Respirology, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 551-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.13462

Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT). / on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases.

In: Respirology, Vol. 24, No. 6, 01.06.2019, p. 551-557.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT)

AU - on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases

AU - Koo, Hyeon Kyoung

AU - Jeong, Ina

AU - Kim, Joo Hee

AU - Kim, Sung Kyoung

AU - Shin, Jong Wook

AU - Park, So Young

AU - Rhee, Chin Kook

AU - Choi, Eun Young

AU - Moon, Ji Yong

AU - Kim, Yee Hyung

AU - Lee, Hyun

AU - Kang, Hye Seon

AU - Min, Kyung Hoon

AU - Kim, Jin Woo

AU - Kim, Je Hyeong

AU - Lee, Sang Haak

AU - Yoo, Kwang Ha

AU - Kim, Deog Kyeom

AU - Yoon, Hyoung Kyu

AU - Kim, Dong Gyu

AU - Kim, Hui Jung

AU - Jung, Ki Suck

AU - Kim, Deog Kyeom

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Background and objective: A cough-specific quality-of-life questionnaire is recommended to assess the impact of cough; however, a simple instrument to quantify cough is required for everyday clinical practice. This study was aimed to develop a short patient-completed questionnaire (COugh Assessment Test, COAT). Methods: The COAT was developed and validated by comparison with the Korean version of Leicester Cough Questionnaire (K-LCQ) and cough numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10, 11-point scale) for chronic cough patients. Results: Item selection identified five items regarding cough frequency, daily activity, sleep disturbance, fatigue and cough hypersensitivity (0–4 scaling of items, 0–20 score range) through reliability test cohort (n = 78). Test–retest reliability was strong (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.88). The final COAT was compared with K-LCQ and cough NRS in a validation cohort (n = 323). In Rasch analysis, COAT fitted well to a unidimensional model. Pearson correlations of COAT versus K-LCQ (i) before treatment, (ii) after treatment; COAT versus cough NRS (iii) before treatment, (iv) after treatment; (v) delta-COAT versus delta-cough NRS, (vi) delta-COAT versus delta-K-LCQ were (i) −0.71, (ii) −0.81, (iii) 0.69, (iv) 0.82, (v) −0.66 and (vi) 0.72, respectively. Conclusion: The COAT is a useful, simple questionnaire for assessing and monitoring cough.

AB - Background and objective: A cough-specific quality-of-life questionnaire is recommended to assess the impact of cough; however, a simple instrument to quantify cough is required for everyday clinical practice. This study was aimed to develop a short patient-completed questionnaire (COugh Assessment Test, COAT). Methods: The COAT was developed and validated by comparison with the Korean version of Leicester Cough Questionnaire (K-LCQ) and cough numeric rating scale (NRS, 0–10, 11-point scale) for chronic cough patients. Results: Item selection identified five items regarding cough frequency, daily activity, sleep disturbance, fatigue and cough hypersensitivity (0–4 scaling of items, 0–20 score range) through reliability test cohort (n = 78). Test–retest reliability was strong (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.88). The final COAT was compared with K-LCQ and cough NRS in a validation cohort (n = 323). In Rasch analysis, COAT fitted well to a unidimensional model. Pearson correlations of COAT versus K-LCQ (i) before treatment, (ii) after treatment; COAT versus cough NRS (iii) before treatment, (iv) after treatment; (v) delta-COAT versus delta-cough NRS, (vi) delta-COAT versus delta-K-LCQ were (i) −0.71, (ii) −0.81, (iii) 0.69, (iv) 0.82, (v) −0.66 and (vi) 0.72, respectively. Conclusion: The COAT is a useful, simple questionnaire for assessing and monitoring cough.

KW - cough

KW - questionnaire

KW - reliability

KW - severity

KW - validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060574019&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/resp.13462

DO - 10.1111/resp.13462

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 551

EP - 557

JO - Respirology

JF - Respirology

SN - 1323-7799

IS - 6

ER -

on behalf of the Cough Study Group of the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases. Development and validation of the COugh Assessment Test (COAT). Respirology. 2019 Jun 1;24(6):551-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.13462