Development Process and Cognitive Testing of CARATkids - Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test for Children

Background: Allergic rhinitis and asthma (ARA) are chronic inflammatory diseases of the airways that often coexist in children. The only tool to assess the ARA control, the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) is to be used by adults. We aimed to develop the Pediatric version of Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARATkids) and to test its comprehensibility in children with 4 to 12 years of age. Methods: The questionnaire development included a literature review of pediatric questionnaires on asthma and/or rhinitis control and two consensus meetings of a multidisciplinary group. Cognitive testing was carried out in a cross-sectional qualitative study using cognitive interviews. Results: Four questionnaires to assess asthma and none to assess rhinitis control in children were identified. The multidisciplinary group produced a questionnaire version for children with 17 questions with illustrations and dichotomous (yes/no) response format. The version for caregivers had 4-points and dichotomous scales. Twenty-nine children, 4 to 12 years old, and their caregivers were interviewed. Only children over 6 years old could adequately answer the questionnaire. A few words/expressions were not fully understood by children of 6 to 8 years old. The drawings illustrating the questions were considered helpful by children and caregivers. Caregivers considered the questionnaire complete and clear and preferred dichotomous over the 4-points scales. The proportion of agreement between children and their caregivers was 61%. The words/expressions that were difficult to understand were amended. Conclusion: CARATkids, the first questionnaire to assess a child’s asthma and rhinitis control was developed and its content validity was assured. Cognitive testing showed that CARATKids is well-understood by children 6 to 12 years old. The questionnaire’s measurement properties can now be assessed in a validation study.

Invasive Assessment of the Coronary Microcirculation Using the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance: Description and Validation of an Animal Model

INTRODUCTION: The index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) enables/provides quantitative, invasive, and real-time assessment of coronary microcirculation status. AIMS: The primary aim of this study was to validate the assessment of IMR in a large animal model, and the secondary aim was to compare two doses of intracoronary papaverine, 5 and 10 mg, for induction of maximal hyperemia and its evolution over time. METHODS: Measurements of IMR were performed in eight pigs. Mean distal pressure (Pd) and mean transit time (Tmn) were measured at rest and at maximal hyperemia induced with intracoronary papaverine, 5 and 10 mg, and after 2, 5, 8 and 10 minutes. Disruption of the microcirculation was achieved by selective injection of 40-μm microspheres via a microcatheter in the left anterior descending artery. RESULTS: In each animal 14 IMR measurements were made. There were no differences between the two doses of papaverine regarding Pd response and IMR values - 11 ± 4.5 U with 5 mg and 10.6 ± 3 U with 10 mg (p=0.612). The evolution of IMR over time was also similar with the two doses, with significant differences from resting values disappearing after five minutes of intracoronary papaverine administration. IMR increased with disrupted microcirculation in all animals (41 ± 16 U, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: IMR provides invasive and real-time assessment of coronary microcirculation. Disruption of the microvascular bed is associated with a significant increase in IMR. A 5-mg dose of intracoronary papaverine is as effective as a 10-mg dose in inducing maximal hyperemia. After five minutes of papaverine administration there is no significant difference from resting hemodynamic status.

Impact of Syncope on Quality of Life: Validation of a Measure in Patients Undergoing Tilt Testing

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Recurrent syncope has a significant impact on quality of life. The development of measurement scales to assess this impact that are easy to use in clinical settings is crucial. The objective of the present study is a preliminary validation of the Impact of Syncope on Quality of Life questionnaire for the Portuguese population. METHODS: The instrument underwent a process of translation, validation, analysis of cultural appropriateness and cognitive debriefing. A population of 39 patients with a history of recurrent syncope (>1 year) who underwent tilt testing, aged 52.1 ± 16.4 years (21-83), 43.5% male, most in active employment (n=18) or retired (n=13), constituted a convenience sample. The resulting Portuguese version is similar to the original, with 12 items in a single aggregate score, and underwent statistical validation, with assessment of reliability, validity and stability over time. RESULTS: With regard to reliability, the internal consistency of the scale is 0.9. Assessment of convergent and discriminant validity showed statistically significant results (p<0.01). Regarding stability over time, a test-retest of this instrument at six months after tilt testing with 22 patients of the sample who had not undergone any clinical intervention found no statistically significant changes in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that this instrument is of value for assessing quality of life in patients with recurrent syncope in Portugal.

Validation of Two US Risk Scores for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in a Single-Center Portuguese Population of Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

INTRODUCTION: New scores have been developed and validated in the US for in-hospital mortality risk stratification in patients undergoing coronary angioplasty: the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) risk score and the Mayo Clinic Risk Score (MCRS). We sought to validate these scores in a European population with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to compare their predictive accuracy with that of the GRACE risk score. METHODS: In a single-center ACS registry of patients undergoing coronary angioplasty, we used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), a graphical representation of observed vs. expected mortality, and net reclassification improvement (NRI)/integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) analysis to compare the scores. RESULTS: A total of 2148 consecutive patients were included, mean age 63 years (SD 13), 74% male and 71% with ST-segment elevation ACS. In-hospital mortality was 4.5%. The GRACE score showed the best AUC (0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96) compared with NCDR (0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.91, p=0.0003) and MCRS (0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.90, p=0.0003). In model calibration analysis, GRACE showed the best predictive power. With GRACE, patients were more often correctly classified than with MCRS (NRI 78.7, 95% CI 59.6-97.7; IDI 0.136, 95% CI 0.073-0.199) or NCDR (NRI 79.2, 95% CI 60.2-98.2; IDI 0.148, 95% CI 0.087-0.209). CONCLUSION: The NCDR and Mayo Clinic risk scores are useful for risk stratification of in-hospital mortality in a European population of patients with ACS undergoing coronary angioplasty. However, the GRACE score is still to be preferred.