OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to modify and validate the Satisfaction with Decision Scale and Decision Regret Scale for women who have undergone surgery for pelvic floor disorders. STUDY DESIGN: We adapted the Satisfaction with Decision Scale and Decision Regret Scale for women with pelvic floor disorders. Forty-five women who underwent surgery for pelvic floor disorders were enrolled postoperatively and completed the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders on 2 occasions, 1 week apart. RESULTS: Face and content validity of the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were confirmed by patient interviews and expert panel. The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha: .95 and .88, respectively) and reproducible (intraclass correlations: 0.82 and 0.84, respectively). Larger improvements between preoperative and postoperative Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 scores were positively correlated with the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders (r = 0.42 and 0.49, respectively), and negatively correlated with the Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders (r = -0.60 and -0.63, respectively). The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were negatively correlated with each other (r = -0.55). CONCLUSION: The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders are reliable and valid decision-making outcome measures for women with pelvic floor disorders.
OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to modify and validate the Satisfaction with Decision Scale and Decision Regret Scale for women who have undergone surgery for pelvic floor disorders. STUDY DESIGN: We adapted the Satisfaction with Decision Scale and Decision Regret Scale for women with pelvic floor disorders. Forty-five women who underwent surgery for pelvic floor disorders were enrolled postoperatively and completed the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders on 2 occasions, 1 week apart. RESULTS: Face and content validity of the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were confirmed by patient interviews and expert panel. The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha: .95 and .88, respectively) and reproducible (intraclass correlations: 0.82 and 0.84, respectively). Larger improvements between preoperative and postoperative Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 scores were positively correlated with the Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders (r = 0.42 and 0.49, respectively), and negatively correlated with the Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders (r = -0.60 and -0.63, respectively). The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders were negatively correlated with each other (r = -0.55). CONCLUSION: The Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders and Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorders are reliable and valid decision-making outcome measures for women with pelvic floor disorders.
Authors: Gena C Dunivan; Andrew L Sussman; J Eric Jelovsek; Vivian Sung; Uduak U Andy; Alicia Ballard; Sharon Jakus-Waldman; Cindy L Amundsen; Christopher J Chermansky; Carla M Bann; Donna Mazloomdoost; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jessica C Sassani; Philip J Grosse; Lauren Kunkle; Lindsey Baranski; Mary F Ackenbom Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Brook L McFadden; Melissa L Constantine; Sarah L Hammil; Megan E Tarr; Husam T Abed; Kimberly S Kenton; Vivian W Sung; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Jessica C Sassani; Amanda M Artsen; Philip J Grosse; Lindsey Baranski; Lauren Kunkle; Mary F Ackenbom Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: William D Winkelman; Annliz Macharia; Sonya Bharadwa; Maheetha Bharadwaj; Michele R Hacker; Peter L Rosenblatt Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Gena C Dunivan; Brenna L McGuire; Heidi A Rishel Brakey; Yuko M Komesu; Rebecca G Rogers; Andrew L Sussman Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 2.894