INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: As shorter recall periods are sometimes preferable to longer recall periods, the objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric characteristics and measurement properties of the 1-week recall version of the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q). METHODS: Secondary analyses were performed on data for three 12-week clinical trials of fesoterodine. Patients completed the Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), the Patient Perception of Urgency Scale (PPUS), and 3-day bladder diaries in addition to the OAB-q at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks. Analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability, concurrent and discriminant validity and responsiveness of the OAB-q 1-week recall version. RESULTS: The patients in the three studies (Study 1: N=516, Study 2: N=441; Study 3: N=882) had a mean age of 59.6, 59.4, and 59.9 years, respectively; and most of the patients were female (77.1%, 88.9%, and 82.9%) and White (76.6%, 90.0%, and 88.0%). Patients had been diagnosed with OAB for a mean of 5.2, 8.3, and 9.1 years, respectively. Cronbach's alpha values were greater than 0.85 across all samples and subscales. Correlations between the 1-week recall version of the OAB-q and the PPBC, PPUS, and most of the bladder diary variables were moderate to strong. Discriminant validity of the OAB-q was good, with significant differences in mean OAB-q scores across all response categories of the PPUS. The OAB-q was highly responsive to changes in patients' conditions as indicated by moderate to large effect sizes. The OAB-q 1-week recall version has a similar factor structure to the 4-week recall version with each subscale model demonstrating acceptable fit. CONCLUSION: The 1-week recall version of the OAB-q appears to be reliable, valid, and responsive and is psychometrically equivalent to the 4-week recall version. The validation of the 1-week recall version offers researchers and clinicians an additional option for using the OAB-q.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: As shorter recall periods are sometimes preferable to longer recall periods, the objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric characteristics and measurement properties of the 1-week recall version of the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q). METHODS: Secondary analyses were performed on data for three 12-week clinical trials of fesoterodine. Patients completed the Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), the Patient Perception of Urgency Scale (PPUS), and 3-day bladder diaries in addition to the OAB-q at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks. Analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability, concurrent and discriminant validity and responsiveness of the OAB-q 1-week recall version. RESULTS: The patients in the three studies (Study 1: N=516, Study 2: N=441; Study 3: N=882) had a mean age of 59.6, 59.4, and 59.9 years, respectively; and most of the patients were female (77.1%, 88.9%, and 82.9%) and White (76.6%, 90.0%, and 88.0%). Patients had been diagnosed with OAB for a mean of 5.2, 8.3, and 9.1 years, respectively. Cronbach's alpha values were greater than 0.85 across all samples and subscales. Correlations between the 1-week recall version of the OAB-q and the PPBC, PPUS, and most of the bladder diary variables were moderate to strong. Discriminant validity of the OAB-q was good, with significant differences in mean OAB-q scores across all response categories of the PPUS. The OAB-q was highly responsive to changes in patients' conditions as indicated by moderate to large effect sizes. The OAB-q 1-week recall version has a similar factor structure to the 4-week recall version with each subscale model demonstrating acceptable fit. CONCLUSION: The 1-week recall version of the OAB-q appears to be reliable, valid, and responsive and is psychometrically equivalent to the 4-week recall version. The validation of the 1-week recall version offers researchers and clinicians an additional option for using the OAB-q.
Authors: Louis S Matza; Christine L Thompson; Joel Krasnow; Jessica Brewster-Jordan; Teresa Zyczynski; Karin S Coyne Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2005 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Dirk de Ridder; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Bary Berghmans; Joseph Lee; Ash Monga; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2010 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: W F Stewart; J B Van Rooyen; G W Cundiff; P Abrams; A R Herzog; R Corey; T L Hunt; A J Wein Journal: World J Urol Date: 2002-11-15 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Alexandra I Barsdorf; Martin Carlsson; Andrew G Bushmakin; Sheila Quinn; Joseph C Cappelleri; Andreas Pleil Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: W Stuart Reynolds; Stephen Mock; Xuechao Zhang; Melissa Kaufman; Alan Wein; Stephen Bruehl; Roger Dmochowski Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Casey G Kowalik; Joshua A Cohn; Sophia Delpe; Melissa R Kaufman; Alan Wein; Roger R Dmochowski; W Stuart Reynolds Journal: J Urol Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 7.450