Literature DB >> 15449078

Development and validation of a colorectal functional outcome questionnaire.

Roel Bakx1, Mirjam A G Sprangers, Frans J Oort, Willem F van Tets, Willem A Bemelman, J Frederik M Slors, J Jan B van Lanschot.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: After colorectal surgery, patients often experience impaired functional outcome. Faecal incontinence grading systems and self-assessment questionnaires are frequently used to assess these complaints. The available faecal incontinence grading systems have been validated, but have a limited focus, while more comprehensive questionnaires, which have been developed, have not been validated. AIMS: To investigate the reliability and validity of a newly developed, colorectal functional outcome (COREFO) questionnaire and of Dutch translations of the Hallböök questionnaire and an adapted version of the Vaizey questionnaire. PATIENT/
METHODS: Two hundred fifty-seven patients with and without impaired functional outcome after (colorectal) surgery received a booklet containing the three questionnaires in random order by mail. One hundred seventy-nine (70%) completed them, and 160 patients (90%) completed a retest within, on average, 18 days. RESULTS/
FINDINGS: Reliability and validity were adequate for the COREFO and Hallböök questionnaire, with slight differences in the psychometric analyses in favour of the COREFO questionnaire. Significantly more patients found the COREFO questionnaire to reflect their problems best. The reliability of the Vaizey questionnaire was not sufficient. INTERPRETATION/
CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed COREFO questionnaire and the previously unvalidated Hallböök questionnaire are both suitable instruments to evaluate functional outcome after colorectal surgery. The psychometric analyses showed a slight difference in favour of the COREFO questionnaire and significantly more patients preferred the COREFO questionnaire to the other questionnaires. Therefore, we prefer to use the COREFO questionnaire in future research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15449078     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-004-0638-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  23 in total

1.  Validation of a questionnaire to assess fecal incontinence and associated risk factors: Fecal Incontinence Questionnaire.

Authors:  W T Reilly; N J Talley; J H Pemberton; A R Zinsmeister
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Comparison of J-pouch and coloplasty pouch for low rectal cancers: a randomized, controlled trial investigating functional results and comparative anastomotic leak rates.

Authors:  Yik-Hong Ho; Steven Brown; Siu-Meng Heah; Charles Tsang; Francis Seow-Choen; Kong-Weng Eu; Choong Leong Tang
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Prospective evaluation of anorectal function after total mesorectal excision for rectal carcinoma with or without preoperative radiotherapy.

Authors:  P van Duijvendijk; J F M Slors; C W Taat; W F van Tets; G van Tienhoven; H Obertop; G E E Boeckxstaens
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems.

Authors:  C J Vaizey; E Carapeti; J A Cahill; M A Kamm
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Randomized comparison of straight and colonic J pouch anastomosis after low anterior resection.

Authors:  O Hallböök; L Påhlman; M Krog; S D Wexner; R Sjödahl
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  Etiology and management of fecal incontinence.

Authors:  J M Jorge; S D Wexner
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Functional results of delayed coloanal anastomosis after preoperative radiotherapy for lower third rectal cancer.

Authors:  E Olagne; J Baulieux; E de la Roche; M Adham; N Berthoux; O Bourdeix; J P Gerard; C Ducerf
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Epidemiology of fecal incontinence: the silent affliction.

Authors:  J F Johanson; J Lafferty
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Functional outcome after low anterior resection with low anastomosis for rectal cancer using the colonic J-pouch. Prospective randomized study for determination of optimum pouch size.

Authors:  J Hida; M Yasutomi; K Fujimoto; K Okuno; S Ieda; N Machidera; R Kubo; K Shindo; K Koh
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  Pullthrough operation with delayed anastomosis for rectal cancer.

Authors:  W O Kirwan; R B Turnbull; V W Fazio; F L Weakley
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1978-10       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  26 in total

Review 1.  Development of an online library of patient-reported outcome measures in gastroenterology: the GI-PRO database.

Authors:  Puja Khanna; Nikhil Agarwal; Dinesh Khanna; Ron D Hays; Lin Chang; Roger Bolus; Gil Melmed; Cynthia B Whitman; Robert M Kaplan; Rikke Ogawa; Bradley Snyder; Brennan Mr Spiegel
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Strong agreement between interview-obtained and self-administered Wexner and St. Mark's scores using a single questionnaire.

Authors:  Stig Norderval; Mona Birgitte Rydningen; Ragnhild Sørum Falk; Arvid Stordahl; Hege Hølmo Johannessen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Patient-Reported Outcomes in Surgical Oncology: An Overview of Instruments and Scores.

Authors:  Joseph D Phillips; Sandra L Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Two-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through coloanal anastomosis versus coloanal anastomosis with protective loop ileostomy for low rectal cancer. Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Turnbull-BCN).

Authors:  Sebastiano Biondo; Loris Trenti; Ana Galvez; Eloy Espin-Basany; Francesco Bianco; Giovanni Romano; Esther Kreisler
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Responsiveness and interpretability of incontinence severity scores and FIQL in patients with fecal incontinence: a secondary analysis from a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  E M J Bols; H J M Hendriks; L C M Berghmans; C G M I Baeten; R A de Bie
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Interview-based versus self-reported anal incontinence using St Mark's incontinence score.

Authors:  Hege Hølmo Johannessen; Stig Norderval; Arvid Stordahl; Ragnhild Sørum Falk; Arne Wibe
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Anal fistula plug vs mucosa advancement flap in complex fistula-in-ano: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qiang Leng; Hei-Ying Jin
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-11-27

Review 8.  Adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemoradiation or radiotherapy in rectal cancer--a review focusing on open questions.

Authors:  Lutz Moser; Jörg-Peter Ritz; Wolfgang Hinkelbein; Stefan Höcht
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Patient-reported outcomes in gastroenterology: clinical and research applications.

Authors:  Brennan M R Spiegel
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 4.924

Review 10.  Surgical Treatment Alternatives to Sacral Neuromodulation for Fecal Incontinence: Injectables, Sphincter Repair, and Colostomy.

Authors:  Srinivas Joga Ivatury; Lauren R Wilson; Ian M Paquette
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2021-01-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.