Catherine J Teig1,2,3, Margreth Grotle4,5, Malcolm J Bond6, Cecilia A C Prinsen7, Marie A Ellström Engh8,9, Milada S Cvancarova5,10, Møyfrid Kjøllesdal11, Angelita Martini6,12. 1. School of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia. chpl@ahus.no. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. chpl@ahus.no. 3. The Pelvic Floor Centre, Division of Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, 1000, 1478, Lørenskog, Norway. chpl@ahus.no. 4. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 5. FORMI, Clinic for Surgery and Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 6. School of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia. 7. VU University Medical Center, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute for Health and Care Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 9. Faculty Division Akershus University Hospital, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 10. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 11. Drammens Gynaecology Private Clinic, Drammen, Norway. 12. Centre for Health Services Research, School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The goal was to translate into Norwegian, and validate, short versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) using a sample of women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. METHODS: Modified European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Guidelines were used for translation and cultural adaptation. Of 212 eligible Norwegian women who consented to participate, 205 completed the questionnaires, of whom 50 were retested after 1 - 3 weeks, and 76 were tested 6 months after surgery. Reliability, validity and responsiveness were evaluated. Additionally, interpretability, the smallest detectable change, the standard error of measurement, floor and ceiling effects, and the percentages of missing items are reported. RESULTS: Reliability ranged from 0.66 to 0.93 and intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.85 to 0.94. Both construct validity and responsiveness were found to be adequate. The responsiveness of the PFDI-20 was further supported by areas under the curve above 0.70. Estimates were lower for the PFIQ-7. The smallest detectable changes at the individual level were 15 - 21 % and 17 - 27 % for the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7, respectively. The absolute values of the minimal important changes in the total scores were 48 and 47, respectively. No floor or ceiling effects were evident in the distributions of the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 total scores. CONCLUSIONS: The translated questionnaires provided adequate reliability, validity and good responsiveness to change. These short versions of the PFDI and PFIQ are robust measuring instruments that will enable symptom severity and health-related quality of life to be evaluated in the Norwegian context.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The goal was to translate into Norwegian, and validate, short versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) using a sample of women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. METHODS: Modified European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Guidelines were used for translation and cultural adaptation. Of 212 eligible Norwegian women who consented to participate, 205 completed the questionnaires, of whom 50 were retested after 1 - 3 weeks, and 76 were tested 6 months after surgery. Reliability, validity and responsiveness were evaluated. Additionally, interpretability, the smallest detectable change, the standard error of measurement, floor and ceiling effects, and the percentages of missing items are reported. RESULTS: Reliability ranged from 0.66 to 0.93 and intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.85 to 0.94. Both construct validity and responsiveness were found to be adequate. The responsiveness of the PFDI-20 was further supported by areas under the curve above 0.70. Estimates were lower for the PFIQ-7. The smallest detectable changes at the individual level were 15 - 21 % and 17 - 27 % for the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7, respectively. The absolute values of the minimal important changes in the total scores were 48 and 47, respectively. No floor or ceiling effects were evident in the distributions of the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 total scores. CONCLUSIONS: The translated questionnaires provided adequate reliability, validity and good responsiveness to change. These short versions of the PFDI and PFIQ are robust measuring instruments that will enable symptom severity and health-related quality of life to be evaluated in the Norwegian context.
Entities:
Keywords:
PFDI-20; PFIQ-7; Pelvic floor dysfunction; Pelvic organ prolapse; Quality of life; Questionnaire translation
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Ingrid Nygaard; Matthew D Barber; Kathryn L Burgio; Kimberly Kenton; Susan Meikle; Joseph Schaffer; Cathie Spino; William E Whitehead; Jennifer Wu; Debra J Brody Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Victoria L Handa; Matthew D Barber; Stephen B Young; Michael P Aronson; Abraham Morse; Geoffrey W Cundiff Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2008-05-17
Authors: R G Rogers; T H Rockwood; M L Constantine; R Thakar; D N Kammerer-Doak; R N Pauls; M Parekh; B Ridgeway; S Jha; J Pitkin; F Reid; S E Sutherland; E S Lukacz; C Domoney; P Sand; G W Davila; M E Espuna Pons Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-04-30 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Lea Tami Suzuki Zuchelo; Italla Maria Pinheiro Bezerra; Adna Thaysa Marcial Da Silva; Jéssica Menezes Gomes; José Maria Soares Júnior; Edmund Chada Baracat; Luiz Carlos de Abreu; Isabel Cristina Esposito Sorpreso Journal: Int J Womens Health Date: 2018-08-08