Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions Scale in the Netherlands

Danny Claessens, Esther A. Boudewijns, Lotte C. E. M. Keijsers, Annerika H. M. Gidding-Slok, Bjorn Winkens and Onno C. P. van Schayck
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2023, 21 (2) 103-111; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2954
Danny Claessens
1Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
MSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: danny.claessens@maastrichtuniversity.nl
Esther A. Boudewijns
1Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
MSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lotte C. E. M. Keijsers
1Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
MSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Annerika H. M. Gidding-Slok
1Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bjorn Winkens
2Department of Methodology and Statistics, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Onno C. P. van Schayck
1Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Visual representation of the ABCC scale outcomes.

    ABCC = Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions; BMI = body mass index; DM = diabetes mellitus; Hypo = hypoglycemia.

    The outcomes of the ABCC scale are visualized into a balloon chart. High green balloons indicate low burden. Low red balloons indicate high burden. Orange and yellow balloons indicate changes between red and green. The results from the previous visit are depicted in gray for easy monitoring.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Outcomes for Each Subgroup

    OutcomeCOPDAsthmaT2D
    Convergent validity
    Comparator instrumentSGRQAQLQ-SADDQoL19
    ComparisonsABCC totalSGRQ totalABCC totalAQLQ-S totalABCC totalADDQoL19 total
    Physical limitationsAll subscalesPhysical limitationsTotal Symptoms ActivityFeelings and emotionsSelf confidence
    Feelings about the future
    Pulmonary complaintsAll subscalesFeelings and emotionsEmotional functioningPhysical limitationsPhysical
    Depend on others
    …………SexualitySex life
    …………Eating and drinkingFreedom to eat
    Freedom to drink
    Threshold for validity, rr ≥0.7r ≤−0.7aTotal score r <−0.7a
    Subscores −0.7 < r <−0.3a,b
    Known group validityc
    Known group 1Exacerbation count:
    <2 vs ≥2d
    Exacerbation count:
    0 vs ≥1d
    Insulin use:
    none vs any
    Hypothesized distinguishable ABCC domainsTotal score
    Night’s rest
    Physical limitation
    Relations and work
    Pulmonary complaints
    Total score
    Night’s rest
    Feelings and emotions
    Relations and work
    Asthma complaints
    Total
    Feelings and emotions
    Physical limitations
    Relations and work
    Hypoglycemia
    Worry about future
    Known group 2Depression:
    HADS <8 vs HADS ≥8
    GINA:
    Controlled vs not
    Complications:
    none vs anye
    Hypothesized distinguishable ABCC domainsTotal score
    Fatigue
    Feelings and emotions
    Physical limitations
    Relations and work
    Pulmonary complaints
    Total score
    Night’s rest
    Feelings and emotions
    Physical limitations
    Relations and work
    Sexuality
    Asthma complaints
    Total
    Feelings and emotions
    Physical limitations
    Relations and work
    Known group 3……Obesity:
    BMI <30 vs ≥30
    Hypothesized distinguishable ABCC domains……Total
    Feelings and emotions
    Physical limitations
    Relations and work
    Eating and drinking
    Internal consistency
    Accepted threshold, α
    Total scale α ≥0.9; subscales α ≥0.7
    Test-retest reliability
    Accepted threshold, ICC
    ICC ≥0.9
    • α = Chronbach’s alpha; ABCC = Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions; ADDQoL19 = 19-item Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life; AQLQ-S = Standardized Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire; BMI = body mass index; COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; GINA = Global Initiative for Asthma; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; ICC = intraclass coefficient; QoL = quality of life; r = Pearson correlation coefficient; SGRQ = Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire; T2D = type 2 diabetes.

    • ↵a As the ABCC scale implies high burden at high scores, and both the AQLQ and ADDQoL19 imply high burden (or low QoL) at low scores, the correlation between these scales is inverse and thus negative.

    • ↵b Both scales have single-item domains/subscores, therefore the hypothesized correlation is expected to be moderate.

    • ↵c Significant difference in groups, P ≤.05.

    • ↵d Based on Dutch medical guidelines.14,15

    • ↵e Any of the following complications: nephropathy, neuropathy, retinopathy, sexual dysfunction, amputation of any limb, diabetic foot, cardiovascular disease.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Baseline Characteristics for Each Subgroup

    CharacteristicCOPD
    (n = 65)
    Asthma
    (n = 62)
    T2D
    (n = 60)
    Male sex, No. (%)39 (60.0)19 (30.6)30 (50.0)
    Age, mean (SD), y66 (6.9)56 (13.4)66 (9.5)
    Highest level of education, No. (%)a
        Lowb26 (40.0)18 (29.0)29 (48.3)
        Middlec  3 (4.6)10 (16.1)  6 (10.0)
        Highd36 (55.4)34 (54.8)25 (41.7)
    Diagnosed since, No. (%), y
        <1  1 (1.5)  1 (1.6)  1 (1.7)
        1-3  4 (6.2)  4 (6.5)…
        >360 (92.357 (91.9)…
        1-15……40 (66.7)
        >15……19 (31.7)
    Smoking status, No. (%)
        Never  6 (9.2)34 (54.8)…
        Former58 (89.2)28 (45.2)…
        Current  1 (1.5)  0 (0.0)…
    Treated by, No. (%)
        General practitioner11 (17.5)17 (31.5)48 (82.8)
        Medical specialist52 (82.5)37 (68.5)10 (17.2)
        Unknown  2  8  2
    Exacerbations, previous year, No. (%)
        019 (29.2)16 (25.8)…
        119 (29.2)  8 (12.9)…
        2  9 (13.8)15 (24.2)…
        >218 (27.7)23 (37.1)…
    Medication, No. (%)
    No medication  0 (0.0)  1 (1.6)  5 (8.3)
    Any of the following:
        SABA/SAMA40 (61.5)45 (72.6)…
        LABA/LAMA49 (75.4)22 (35.5)…
        ICS17 (26.2)37 (59.7)…
        Combination medication (ICS + LABA/LAMA)35 (53.8)43 (69.4)…
        Metformin……40 (66.7)
        Gliclazide, glimepiride, or tolbutamide……22 (36.7)
        Insulin……27 (45.0)
    • COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ICS = inhaled corticosteroids; LABA = long-acting β2-agonist; LAMA = long-acting muscarinic antagonists; SABA = short-acting β2-agonist; SAMA = short-acting muscarinic antagonists; T2D = type 2 diabetes.

    • ↵a According to the Education Systems in the Netherlands.39

    • ↵b Elementary school, pre-vocational secondary education and training, or secondary vocational education and training.

    • ↵c Senior general secondary education or pre-university education.

    • ↵d Higher professional education or university education.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Psychometric Properties of the ABCC Scale for People with COPD (n = 65)

    Convergent validity, SGRQ, r
    ABCC domainsTotalActivityImpactSymptoms
    ABCC total0.866a0.797a0.806a0.734a
        Physical limitation0.829a0.831a0.743a0.668
        Pulmonary complaints0.761a0.6360.6970.773a
    Known group validity, median (IQR)
    <2
    Exacerbations E
    (n = 33)
    ≥2
    Exacerbations
    (n = 32)
    P value
    ABCC total1.6 (0.9-2.6)2.6 (2.4-3.6)<.001
        Night’s rest2.0 (0.5-2.5)2.5 (2.0-3.0)  .006
        Feelings and emotions1.0 (0.3-2.0)2.0 (1.0-2.7)  .010
        Physical limitations2.3 (1.0-4.2)3.7 (3.0-4.9)  .003
        Relations and work1.0 (0.5-3.0)3.0 (2.0-4.0)<.001
        Pulmonary complaints2.3 (1.6-3.0)3.3 (2.6-3.9)<.001
    Not depressedb
    (n = 50)
    Depressedb
    (n = 15)
    P value
    ABCC total2.1 (1.2-2.9)3.1 (2.5-3.9).001
        Fatigue3.0 (2.0-4.0)4.0 (3.0-5.0).022
        Feelings and emotions1.0 (0.3-2.0)2.0 (1.7-2.7).001
        Physical limitations3.0 (1.3-4.3)3.7 (3.0-4.7).057
        Relations and work2.0 (1.0-3.0)3.0 (3.0-4.0).002
        Pulmonary complaints2.6 (1.8-3.5)3.0 (2.5-4.0).061
    Reliability measures
    Internal consistency, Cronbach’s α (95% CI)
    Total scale0.90 (0.86-0.93)
        Physical limitations0.92 (0.88-0.95)
        Feelings and emotions0.77 (0.64-0.85)
        Pulmonary complaints0.65 (0.49-0.77)
    Test-retest reliability, ICC (95% CI) (n = 60)
    0.95 (0.92-0.97)
    • ABCC = Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions; COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ICC = intraclass coefficient; IQR = interquartile range; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; r = Pearson correlation coefficient; SGRQ = Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire.

    • ↵a r >0.7.

    • ↵b Depression determined with HADS score, <8 not depressed, ≥8 depressed.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Psychometric Properties of the ABCC Scale for People With Asthma (n = 62)

    Convergent validity, AQLQ-S, r
    ABCC domainsTotalSymptomsActivity LimitationEmotional Function
    ABCC total−0.851a−0.842a−0.831a…
        Feelings and emotions………−0.725a
        Physical limitation−0.777a−0.782a−0.797a…
        Asthma complaints−0.835a−0.865a−0.805a…
    Known group validity, median (IQR)
    No Exacerbations
    (n = 16)
    ≥1 Exacerbations
    (n = 46)
    P value
    ABCC total1.5 (0.9-1.9)2.5 (1.8-3.1)<.001
        Night’s rest2.0 (1.0-2.0)3.0 (2.0-4.0)  .001
        Feelings and emotions1.0 (0.8-1.3)1.3 (0.6-2.0)  .049
        Physical limitations1.7 (0.7-2.0)2.3 (1.7-3.3)<.001
        Relations and work1.0 (0.0-2.0)3.0 (2.0-4.0)  .001
        Asthma complaints0.8 (0.5-1.6)3.0 (2.0-3.8)<.001
    Controlledb
    (n = 18)
    Uncontrolledb
    (n =43)
    P value
    ABCC total1.4 (1.0-1.8)2.7 (2.0-3.2)<.001
        Night’s rest2.0 (1.0-3.0)3.0 (2.0-4.0)0.003
        Feelings/emotions0.5 (0.0-1.0)1.3 (1.0-2.0)<.001
        Physical limitations1.0 (0.7-2.0)2.3 (1.7-3.3)<.001
        Relations and work1.0 (0.0-2.0)3.0 (2.0-4.0)<.001
        Sexuality0.5 (0.0-2.0)2.0 (0.0-3.0)  .042
        Asthma complaints0.8 (0.2-1.5)3.0 (2.3-3.8)<.001
    Reliability measures
    Internal consistency, Cronbach’s α (95% CI)
    Total scale0.92 (0.89-0.95)
        Physical limitations0.88 (0.82-0.93)
        Feelings and emotions0.74 (0.60-0.83)
        Asthma complaints0.73 (0.61-0.83)
    Test-retest reliability, ICC (95% CI) (n = 60)
    0.93 (0.87-0.96)
    • ABCC = Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions; AQLQ-S = Standardized Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire; ICC = intraclass coefficient; IQR = interquartile range; GINA = Global Initiative for Asthma; r = Pearson correlation coefficient.

    • ↵a r < −0.7.

    • ↵b Groups determined by GINA guidelines. Well and partially controlled combined into single group.

    • View popup
    Table 5.

    Psychometric Properties of the ABCC Scale for People With T2D (n = 60)

    Convergent validity, ADDQoL19, r
    ABCC domainsADDQoL19 domainsr
    ABCC totalAverage WI−0.548
        Feelings and emotionsSelf-confidence−0.260
    Feelings about the future−0.379a
        Physical limitationsPhysical−0.391a
    Depend on others−0.459a
        Relations and workLeisure−0.441a
    Work−0.664a
    Family life−0.413a
    Friendships and social life−0.448a
        SexualitySex life−0.650a
        Eating and drinkingFreedom to eat−0.346a
    Freedom to drink−0.167
    Known group validity, median (IQR)
    Insulin independent
    (n = 32)
    Insulin dependent
    (n = 27)
    P value
    ABCC total1.1 (0.7-1.5)1.9 (1.4-2.7).001a
        Feelings and emotions1.0 (0.5-1.9)1.5 (1.0-3.0).025a
        Physical limitations1.0 (0.3-1.7)2.7 (1.3-3.0).004a
        Relations and work0.0 (0.0-1.0)2.0 (0.0-3.0).005a
        Hypoglycaemia1.0 (0.0-1.8)2.0 (0.0-2.0).038a
        Worry about future1.0 (0.0-2.0)2.0 (1.0-3.0).051
    No complications
    (n = 12)
    ≥1 complications
    (n = 48)
    P value
    ABCC total0.9 (0.4-1.3)1.7 (1.1-2.6).001a
        Feelings/emotions0.5 (0.0-1.0)1.3 (1.0-2.5).001a
        Physical limitations0.5 (0.0-1.5)1.7 (1.0-3.0).007a
        Relations and work0.0 (0.0-1.0)1.0 (0.0-2.0).031a
    BMI <30
    (n = 44)
    BMI ≥30
    (n = 16)
    P value
    ABCC total1.2 (0.8-2.1)1.9 (1.5-2.8).008a
        Feelings and emotions1.0 (0.5-1.9)1.8 (1.0-2.5).003a
        Physical limitations1.2 (0.3-2.6)2.9 (1.4-3.6).003a
        Relations and work0.0 (0.0-2.0)2.0 (1.0-2.0).018a
        Eating and drinking2.0 (1.0-2.8)1.5 (1.0-3.8).830
    Reliability measures
    Internal consistency, Cronbach’s α (95% CI)
    Total scale0.91 (0.87-0.94)
        Physical limitations0.87 (0.80-0.92)
        Feelings and emotions0.76 (0.60-0.85)
    Test-retest reliability, ICC (95% CI)
    0.95 (0.91-0.97)
    • ABCC = Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions; ADDQoL19 = 19-Item Audit for Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life; BMI = body mass index; ICC = intraclass coefficient; IQR = interquartile range; r = Pearson correlation coefficient; WI = weighted impact.

    • ↵a r < −0.7 for total scales or −0.7 < r < −0.3 for single item-correlations.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS IN PDF FILE BELOW

    • ClaessensSuppApps.pdf -

      PDF file

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 21 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 21 (2)
Vol. 21, Issue 2
March/April 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • Plain-Language Article Summaries
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

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.
Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions Scale in the Netherlands
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions Scale in the Netherlands
Danny Claessens, Esther A. Boudewijns, Lotte C. E. M. Keijsers, Annerika H. M. Gidding-Slok, Bjorn Winkens, Onno C. P. van Schayck
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2023, 21 (2) 103-111; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2954

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Validity and Reliability of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions Scale in the Netherlands
Danny Claessens, Esther A. Boudewijns, Lotte C. E. M. Keijsers, Annerika H. M. Gidding-Slok, Bjorn Winkens, Onno C. P. van Schayck
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2023, 21 (2) 103-111; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2954
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions tool in Dutch primary care: a context analysis
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Seven Opportunities for Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care Electronic Visits: Qualitative Study of Staff and Patient Views
  • Agile Implementation of a Digital Cognitive Assessment for Dementia in Primary Care
  • Authorship Inequity in Global Health Research Conducted in Low- and Middle-Income Countries and Published in High-Income Country Family Medicine Journals
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Chronic illness
  • Person groups:
    • Older adults
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Health services
  • Other topics:
    • Communication / decision making
    • Multimorbidity
    • Patient perspectives

Keywords

  • asthma
  • diabetes mellitus
  • patient reported outcome measures
  • pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive
  • vaildation study

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine