Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salmeterol on asthma quality of life

MP Rutten-van Molken, F Custers, EK van Doorslaer, CC Jansen, L Heurman, FP Maesen, JJ Smeets, AM Bommer, JA Raaijmakers
European Respiratory Journal 1995 8: 888-898; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.95.08060888
MP Rutten-van Molken
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F Custers
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
EK van Doorslaer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
CC Jansen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L Heurman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
FP Maesen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JJ Smeets
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
AM Bommer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JA Raaijmakers
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Quality of life measures are increasingly used as important efficacy endpoints in studies of drugs for asthma. The purpose of this study was to assess both the sensitivity to change and the construct validity of four different quality of life instruments in patients with asthma. In a double-blind, parallel group study, 120 moderate asthma patients, aged between 18-70 yrs, received either inhaled salmeterol 50 micrograms b.i.d. or inhaled salbutamol 400 micrograms b.i.d. In addition to respiratory outcomes, quality of life was measured at a 6 weeks follow-up using: 1) Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ); 2) Living With Asthma Questionnaire (LWAQ); 3) Sickness Impact Profile (SIP); 4) Rating Scale (RS); and Standard Gamble (SG) utilities. Salmeterol led to significant improvements over salbutamol on virtually all clinical outcomes. Although all the quality of life instruments showed the same trend in favour of salmeterol, only the AQLQ and RS utilities showed significantly greater improvement on salmeterol than on salbutamol. Except for the AQLQ, the correlation between change in lung function and change in quality of life was generally low. Whereas, the AQLQ correlated well with the patient's overall assessment of efficacy (r = 0.64), the LWAQ, SIP and utilities failed to show such a correlation. The AQLQ showed the best correlation with symptom scores. The cross-sectional correlation between the AQLQ and the LWAQ was 0.73, whereas the longitudinal correlation was only 0.29. The SG generally showed poor correlation with other measures, including the RS. In conclusion, patients given salmeterol showed a greater improvement in quality of life compared to patients given salbutamol. Of the disease-specific questionnaires the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire was found to be more responsive to change than the Living With Asthma Questionnaire and showed greater validity. Of the generic instruments, the rating scale utilities were most responsive. The Standard Gamble showed poor correlation with other measures.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 8 Issue 6 Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salmeterol on asthma quality of life
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salmeterol on asthma quality of life
MP Rutten-van Molken, F Custers, EK van Doorslaer, CC Jansen, L Heurman, FP Maesen, JJ Smeets, AM Bommer, JA Raaijmakers
European Respiratory Journal Jun 1995, 8 (6) 888-898; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.95.08060888

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Comparison of performance of four instruments in evaluating the effects of salmeterol on asthma quality of life
MP Rutten-van Molken, F Custers, EK van Doorslaer, CC Jansen, L Heurman, FP Maesen, JJ Smeets, AM Bommer, JA Raaijmakers
European Respiratory Journal Jun 1995, 8 (6) 888-898; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.95.08060888
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Inhaled isotonic alkaline versus saline solution and radioaerosol clearance in chronic cough
  • Lung volume reduction surgery versus conservative treatment in severe emphysema
  • Effects of mandibular advancement on respiratory resistance
Show more Clinical Trial

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society