Nuriye Özengin1, Serap Kaya2, Ceren Orhan2, Yeşim Bakar3, Bülent Duran4, Handan Ankaralı5, Türkan Akbayrak2. 1. School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Abant İzzet Baysal University, 14280, Bolu, Turkey. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. 3. School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Abant İzzet Baysal University, 14280, Bolu, Turkey. ptyesim@yahoo.de. 4. Adatıp Hospital, Sakarya, Turkey. 5. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Düzce University, Düzce, Turkey.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to adapt the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS) into Turkish and evaluate its reliability and validity. METHODS: The POP-SS was adapted into Turkish by following the steps of the intercultural adaptation process. One hundred and three women with symptomatic or asymptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) completed the Turkish POP-SS and other valid and reliable Turkish tools for POP: Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory 6 (POPDI-6), Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory 8 (CRADI-8), Urinary Distress Inventory 6 (UDI-6), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire 7 (POPIQ-7). Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system was also used to assess pelvic support, and patients were divided into three groups based on POP-Q scores. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine internal consistency, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was estimated for test-retest reliability. POP-SS validity was assessed by using the Spearman rank correlation and Kruskal-Wallis analyses. The underlying scale structure was determined by exploratory factor analysis. RESULTS: The POP-SS scale had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.705) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.981; p < 0.001). Among groups, there was statistically significant differences in POP-SS scores. POP-SS scores were also significantly correlated with POPDI-6 (r = 0.830), CRADI-8 (r = 0.525), UDI-6 (r = 0.385), PFDI-20 (r = 0.752), and POPIQ-7 (r = 0.690) (p < 0.001). Two factors were identified by exploratory factor analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The Turkish version of POP-SS is a valid and reliable tool for Turkish women with POP.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to adapt the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS) into Turkish and evaluate its reliability and validity. METHODS: The POP-SS was adapted into Turkish by following the steps of the intercultural adaptation process. One hundred and three women with symptomatic or asymptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) completed the Turkish POP-SS and other valid and reliable Turkish tools for POP: Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory 6 (POPDI-6), Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory 8 (CRADI-8), Urinary Distress Inventory 6 (UDI-6), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire 7 (POPIQ-7). Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system was also used to assess pelvic support, and patients were divided into three groups based on POP-Q scores. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine internal consistency, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was estimated for test-retest reliability. POP-SS validity was assessed by using the Spearman rank correlation and Kruskal-Wallis analyses. The underlying scale structure was determined by exploratory factor analysis. RESULTS: The POP-SS scale had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.705) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.981; p < 0.001). Among groups, there was statistically significant differences in POP-SS scores. POP-SS scores were also significantly correlated with POPDI-6 (r = 0.830), CRADI-8 (r = 0.525), UDI-6 (r = 0.385), PFDI-20 (r = 0.752), and POPIQ-7 (r = 0.690) (p < 0.001). Two factors were identified by exploratory factor analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The Turkish version of POP-SS is a valid and reliable tool for Turkish women with POP.
Entities:
Keywords:
Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score; Pelvic organ prolapse; Reliability; Validity
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: Chiara Ghetti; W Thomas Gregory; S Renee Edwards; Lesley N Otto; Amanda L Clark Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Suzanne Hagen; Diane Stark; Cathryn Glazener; Sylvia Dickson; Sarah Barry; Andrew Elders; Helena Frawley; Mary P Galea; Janet Logan; Alison McDonald; Gladys McPherson; Kate H Moore; John Norrie; Andrew Walker; Don Wilson Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 79.321