The reflux disease questionnaire: A measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials

Michael Shaw, John Dent, Timothy Beebe, Ola Junghard, Ingela Wiklund, Tore Lind, Folke Johnsson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

83 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Critical needs for treatment trials in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) include assessing response to treatment, evaluating symptom severity, and translation of symptom questionnaires into multiple languages. We evaluated the previously validated Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ) for internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness to change during treatment and the concordance between RDQ and specialty physician assessment of symptom severity, after translation into Swedish and Norwegian. Methods: Performance of the RDQ after translation into Swedish and Norwegian was evaluated in 439 patients with presumed GERD in a randomized, double-blind trial of active treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. Results: The responsiveness was excellent across three RDQ indicators. Mean change scores in patients on active treatment were large, also reflected in effect sizes that ranged from a low of 1.05 (dyspepsia) to a high of 2.05 (heartburn) and standardized response means 0.99 (dyspepsia) and 1.52 (heartburn). A good positive correlation between physician severity ratings and RDQ scale scores was seen. The internal consistency reliability using alpha coefficients of the scales, regardless of language, ranged from 0.67 to 0.89. Conclusion: The results provide strong evidence that the RDQ is amenable to translation and represents a viable instrument for assessing response to treatment, and symptom severity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number31
JournalHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes
Volume6
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 30 2008

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The reflux disease questionnaire: A measure for assessment of treatment response in clinical trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this