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



To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as



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