Literature DB >> 15663805

Concurrent validity, internal consistency and responsiveness of the Portuguese version of the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) in women after stress urinary incontinence surgery.

Jose T N Tamanini1, Miriam Dambros, Carlos A L D'Ancona, Paulo C R Palma, Neury J Botega, Luis A S Rios, Cristiano M Gomes, Fabio Baracat, Carlos A Bezerra, Nelson R Netto.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the concurrent validity, internal consistency and responsiveness of King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) in patients who underwent sling procedures for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective open label multicenter study in 4 tertiary referral centers. Sixty-eight female patients were enrolled with urodynamically diagnosed urinary stress incontinence. Patients were treated using surgical procedures, mostly (73%) with the synthetic sling procedure, which has been considered one of the gold standard methods for the treatment of urinary incontinence. The patients were assessed before and after one month of postoperative follow up, using the KHQ in its validated Portuguese version. Patients also underwent preoperative urodynamic test, Stamey incontinence grading, pad usage and the assessment of number of pads used per day. After surgery, patients underwent stress test, Stamey incontinence grading pad usage and the assessment of number of pads used per day.
RESULTS: The concurrent validity showed good correlations in some domains of KHQ to clinical parameters. The internal consistency was higher after treatment compared to preoperative values. Objective parameters, such as pad usage and the assessment of number of pads used per day, had significant correlation with changes in post-treatment scores on KHQ. The responsiveness expressed in terms of standardized effect size (SES) and standardized response mean (SRM) was large.
CONCLUSION: The results showed moderate concurrent validity, strong internal consistency and high responsiveness for KHQ, indicating that it is suitable for measuring outcomes in clinical trials among female patients with stress urinary incontinence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15663805     DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382004000600005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Braz J Urol        ISSN: 1677-5538            Impact factor:   1.541


  6 in total

1.  Quality of life of neurogenic patients: translation and validation of the Portuguese version of Qualiveen.

Authors:  Carlos Arturo Levi D'Ancona; José Tadeu Tamanini; Neury Botega; Nivaldo Lavoura; Ruiter Ferreira; Victor Leitão; Maria Helena Baena M Lopes
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Establishing the content validity of the King's Health Questionnaire in men and women with overactive bladder in the US.

Authors:  Mary Kay Margolis; Vasudha Vats; Karin S Coyne; Con Kelleher
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 3.  Incontinence-specific quality of life measures used in trials of treatments for female urinary incontinence: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sue Ross; Dana Soroka; Amalia Karahalios; Cathryn M A Glazener; E Jean C Hay-Smith; Harold P Drutz
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2005-07-16

4.  Adaptation and validation of the King's Health Questionnaire in Portuguese women with urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Rui Viana; Sara Viana; Félix Neto; Teresa Mascarenhas
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the neurogenic bladder symptom score questionnaire for Brazilian Portuguese.

Authors:  Lisley Keller Liidtke Cintra; José de Bessa; Victor Ikky Kawahara; Thereza Phitoe Abe Ferreira; Miguel Srougi; Linamara Rizzo Battistella; Daniel Rubio de Souza; Homero Bruschini; Cristiano Mendes Gomes
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2019 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 6.  How is pain associated with pelvic mesh implants measured? Refinement of the construct and a scoping review of current assessment tools.

Authors:  Jennifer Todd; Jane E Aspell; Michael C Lee; Nikesh Thiruchelvam
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 2.742

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.