Home > Journals > International Angiology > Past Issues > International Angiology 2017 February;36(1) > International Angiology 2017 February;36(1):75-81



Publication history
Cite this article as


A Journal on Angiology

Official Journal of the International Union of Angiology, the International Union of Phlebology and the Central European Vascular Forum
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,37




International Angiology 2017 February;36(1):75-81

DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.16.03645-2


language: English

Evaluation of self-administered versus interviewer-administered completion of Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire

Bilgin B. BASGOZ 1, Ilker TASCI 2, Birol YILDIZ 3, Cengizhan ACIKEL 4, Hasan K. KABUL 5, Kenan SAGLAM 2

1 Department of Internal Medicine, Golcuk Military Hospital, Golcuk, Turkey; 2 Department of Internal Medicine, Gulhane School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey; 3 Department of Medical Oncology, Gulhane School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey; 4 Department of Biostatistics, Gulhane School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey; 5 Department of Cardiology, Gulhane School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey


BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the impacts of different administration modes on sensitivity and specificity of Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) in estimation of Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) detecting lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD).
METHODS: Eligible respondents aged fifty years or older underwent first a self-administered (SA-) ECQ, and then an interviewer-administered (IA-) ECQ. Interviewing included additional guidance on symptoms relevant to claudication. ABI was measured by hand-held Doppler.
RESULTS: A total of 177 respondents (age: 64.67±9.19, male/female: 80/97) were enrolled. Questions 1, 2, 3, and 5 (collectively defines claudication) were responded significantly different on SA-ECQ and IA-ECQ modes. Markings of pain on the figure of ECQ also changed significantly when the procedure was guided. Of the respondents, none on SA-ECQ and 13.6% on IA-ECQ with positive claudication had a low ABI. Subjects with higher formal education level did similar to the whole group in both modes. Sensitivity and specificity of IA-ECQ was calculated as 25% and 88.5%, respectively, for ABI detected LEAD.
CONCLUSIONS: Respondents’ perceptions of pain, discomfort, exertion or body regions described on ECQ may subject to errors without guidance. ECQ seems reliable in evaluating claudication only when specifically interviewed by an observer.

KEY WORDS: Surveys and questionnaires - Ankle Brachial Index - Lower extremity - Intermittent claudication

top of page

Publication History

Issue published online: January 24, 2017
Article first published online: April 12, 2016
Manuscript accepted: March 31, 2016
Manuscript revised: March 28, 2016
Manuscript received: November 17, 2015

Cite this article as

Basgoz BB, Tasci I, Yildiz B, Acikel C, Kabul HK, Saglam K. Evaluation of self-administered versus interviewer-administered completion of Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire. Int Angiol 2017;36:75-81. DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.16.03645-2

Corresponding author e-mail