Literature DB >> 22867776

Validation of the UFS-QOL-hysterectomy questionnaire: modifying an existing measure for comparative effectiveness research.

Karin S Coyne1, Mary Kay Margolis, Jeanne Murphy, James Spies.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Quality of Life (UFS-QOL) questionnaire, a validated patient-reported outcome measure of fibroid symptoms and health-related quality of life, was modified for use posthysterectomy. This study was conducted to psychometrically validate the UFS-QOL-Hysterectomy questionnaire for potential use in comparative effectiveness research to evaluate uterine fibroid treatments.
METHODS: This multicenter prospective study enrolled premenopausal women aged 30 to 50 years with uterine fibroids who were scheduled for hysterectomy, myomectomy, or uterine fibroid embolization. All participants completed the UFS-QOL questionnaire and short form 36 health survey at baseline prior to treatment and 6 and 12 months postprocedure. Women with hysterectomy completed the UFS-QOL-Hysterectomy questionnaire during follow-up visits. Internal consistency reliability, discriminant and concurrent validity, and responsiveness were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 274 women were enrolled (107 uterine fibroid embolization, 61 myomectomy, and 106 hysterectomy) and 89 (83%), 55 (90%), and 91 (86%), respectively, completed the 12-month follow-up. The mean age was 43.2 (uterine fibroid embolization), 40.6 (myomectomy), and 44.5 (hysterectomy) years; 53%, 43%, and 37%, respectively, were black. Cronbach's alphas for the UFS-QOL-Hysterectomy questionnaire at 6 months ranged from 0.70 to 0.96 and from 0.66 to 0.95 at 12 months. Effect sizes ranged from 1.23 to 2.55, indicating that the UFS-QOL-Hysterectomy questionnaire was highly responsive.
CONCLUSIONS: The UFS-QOL-Hysterectomy questionnaire is a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure of uterine fibroid treatment with hysterectomy and can be used in conjunction with the UFS-QOL questionnaire to compare patient-reported outcomes across treatments.
Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22867776     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.03.1387

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  6 in total

1.  Development of an algorithm to assess unmeasured symptom severity in gynecologic care.

Authors:  Kemi M Doll; Annie Green Howard; Till Stürmer; Tim Carey; Wanda K Nicholson; Erin Carey; Evan Myers; David Nerenz; Whitney R Robinson
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-11-06       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Uterine artery embolization or myomectomy for women with uterine fibroids: Four-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jane Daniels; Lee J Middleton; Versha Cheed; William McKinnon; Fusun Sirkeci; Isaac Manyonda; Anna-Maria Belli; Mary Ann Lumsden; Jonathan Moss; Olivia Wu; Klim McPherson
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X       Date:  2021-11-20

3.  The Comparison of Life Quality between Ultrasound-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound and Laparoscopic Myomectomy for the Treatment of Uterine Fibroids.

Authors:  Bilin Yuan; Xinyi Qin; Jie Xi
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 2.809

4.  Adaptability and clinical applicability of UFS-QoL in Chinese women with uterine fibroid.

Authors:  Wei Xu; Wenzhi Chen; Jinyun Chen; Liang Hu; Xueyao Su; Yuxian Nie; Qiuling Shi
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2022-09-10       Impact factor: 2.742

5.  The Comparing Options for Management: PAtient-centered REsults for Uterine Fibroids (COMPARE-UF) registry: rationale and design.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Stewart; Barbara L Lytle; Laine Thomas; Ganesa R Wegienka; Vanessa Jacoby; Michael P Diamond; Wanda K Nicholson; Raymond M Anchan; Sateria Venable; Kedra Wallace; Erica E Marsh; George L Maxwell; Bijan J Borah; William H Catherino; Evan R Myers
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  A quantitative method for measuring the relationship between an objective endpoint and patient reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Chul Ahn; Xin Fang; Phyllis Silverman; Zhiwei Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.