Dataset Information

Results of owner questionnaires describing long-term outcome in Norwich terriers with upper airway syndrome: 2011-2018.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Norwich terriers are affected by an upper airway syndrome (NTUAS) but little is known about outcome in affected dogs.

Objective

To determine outcome in dogs with NTUAS using owner questionnaires.

Animals

Thirty-four client-owned dogs.

Methods

At initial assessment, owners were questioned about respiratory noises and exercise tolerance. A NTUAS score was prospectively constructed based on the number and severity of obstructive lesions detected endoscopically (range, 0-25). Owner questionnaires on respiratory noises, exercise tolerance, and quality of life (QOL) were obtained 2.2-9.3 years (median, 4.2 years) after endoscopy.

Results

Dogs ranged from 0.5 to 10.7 years of age (median, 4.75 years) at initial examination and no correlation was found between age and NTUAS score (median, 13; range, 1-25). Of 5 possible laryngeal abnormalities, 7 dogs had 1-2, 10 dogs had 3, and 17 dogs had 4-5 abnormalities (median, 3.5). Surgery was performed in 15 dogs, which had higher NTUAS scores (18.5 ± 6.3) than dogs that did not have surgery (7.7 ± 4.7, P < .0001). Scores for QOL ranged from 0 to 31 out of 40, with higher scores indicating worse QOL. Owner surveys resulted in QOL scores of ≤3 in 25/31 dogs (81%), with worse scores in dogs that had surgery performed (median 5, vs 0; P = .003). No correlation was noted between NTUAS and QOL scores, but age at follow-up was weakly associated with worse QOL.

Conclusions and clinical importance

Despite variable severity of NTUAS scores, owners reported excellent QOL for most Norwich terriers examined.

SUBMITTER: Johnson LR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8295680 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePatient-reported outcome (PRO) measures address the need for patient-centered data and are now used in diverse clinical, research, and policy pursuits. They are important in conditions causing upper airway-related dyspnea in which the patient's reported experience and physiological data can be discrepant.ObjectivesTo perform a systematic review of the literature on upper airway dyspnea-related PRO measures and to rigorously evaluate each measure's developmental properties, validation, and applicability.Evidence reviewThis study strictly adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE via the PubMed interface, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Health and Psychosocial Instruments (HaPI) database were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and upper airway-related dyspnea. Three investigators performed abstract review, and 2 investigators independently performed full-text review by applying an established checklist to evaluate the conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretability, and respondent burden and presentation of each identified instrument. The initial literature search was conducted in November 2014 and was updated in April 2016.FindingsOf 1269 studies reviewed, 3 upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures met criteria for inclusion. One PRO measure was designed de novo to assess upper airway-related dyspnea symptoms and monitor treatment outcomes, while 2 were adapted from established instruments designed for lower airway disease. Measurement properties and psychometric characteristics differed, and none met all checklist criteria. Two met a criterion in each of 7 domains evaluated. Two demonstrated test-retest and internal consistency reliability, and 2 showed that their scores were responsive to change. Thematic deficiencies in current upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures are lack of patient involvement in item development (content validity), plan for interpretation, and literacy level assessments.Conclusions and relevancePRO measures are critical in the assessment of patients with upper airway-related dyspnea. Three instruments with disparate developmental rigor have been designed or adapted to assess this construct. Care must be taken to understand the measurement characteristics and contextual relevance before applying these PRO measures for clinical, research, or quality initiatives.