Literature DB >> 32488321

Validation and cultural translation for the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Questionnaire for Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis.

Camila Carvalho de Araujo1, Cassia Raquel T Juliato1, Andrea de Andrade Marques2, Amanda Reis1, Luiz Gustavo O Brito3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Short questionnaires are important for validating the clinical diagnosis of urinary incontinence (UI). We sought to validate and culturally translate the Questionnaire for Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis (QUID) for the Brazilian Portuguese language.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study with 457 women (330 with urinary incontinence and 127 controls) was performed in a Southeastern Brazilian outpatient clinic. Patients answered a pilot-tested, notarized, six-item questionnaire (QUID) for internal consistency as well as a control questionnaire (ICIQ-SF and ICIQ-OAB) for construct validity. In both groups, floor and ceiling effects were calculated. Within UI women, test-retest (n = 41) and responsiveness to conservative treatment (n = 74) were also analyzed.
RESULTS: Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) from the QUID was adequate between the UI (0.845-0.850) and control (0.724-0.775) groups. Mean QUID scores were statistically different between UI and control groups (p < 0.05). No ceiling or floor effects were observed in incontinent patients. Test-retest reliability after 4 weeks (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.780-0.814) and responsiveness (0.867-0.889) were also adequate within UI women. Construct validity was adequate at all correlations between QUID and ICIQ-SF and ICIQ-OAB (r: 0.19-0.58; p <0.05). Responsiveness was demonstrated by a statistically significant difference in questions/subscale sores after physical therapy.
CONCLUSION: The QUID presented adequate cultural translation, reliability, and good responsiveness to treatment in the Brazilian Portuguese language.
© 2020. The International Urogynecological Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  QUID; Questionnaire; Stress urinary incontinence; Urgency incontinence; Urinary incontinence; Validation studies

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32488321     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-020-04344-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  3 in total

1.  Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.

Authors:  Jan Kottner; Laurent Audigé; Stig Brorson; Allan Donner; Byron J Gajewski; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Chris Roberts; Mohamed Shoukri; David L Streiner
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  [Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses for testing validity and reliability of the Chinese language questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis].

Authors:  C Y Li; L Zhu; J H Lang; T Xu; X W Shi
Journal:  Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2016-05-25

3.  Descriptive cross sectional study on prevalence, perceptions, predisposing factors and health seeking behaviour of women with stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Jennifer Perera; Dinoo S Kirthinanda; Sujani Wijeratne; Thanuja K Wickramarachchi
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 2.809

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.