Yidi Ma1, Tao Xu, Ye Zhang, Jia Kang, Congcong Ma, Lan Zhu. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to translate the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS) into Chinese and validate it in a population of Chinese women. METHODS: The POP-SS questionnaire was translated into simplified Chinese language following an intercultural adaptation procedure. One hundred forty-six patients who met the inclusion criteria were recruited. Among the enrolled patients, 63 underwent surgery for POP and 50 underwent pessary management. They completed the questionnaires at baseline (T1), 1 to 2 weeks later (T2), and 3 months after intervention (T3). Evaluation for psychometric properties was conducted following with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, content validity, criterion validity, construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. RESULTS: The POP-SS was successfully translated into a Chinese version and achieved good content validity. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.796) was good, and test-retest reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.98; P < 0.001). The construct validity was verified by factor analysis and consistent with the theoretical structure of the original questionnaire. The POP-SS score was also significantly correlated with Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.89, P < 0.001). The confirmatory factor analysis identified two factors: physical symptoms and evacuation symptoms. The mean changes among the participants in very much better (9.80 ± 5.36) and much better (5.67 ± 2.99) groups were larger than those among the participants in the no change group (0.43 ± 2.07). The effect size responsiveness parameter in the much better group (>0.80) was larger than that in the no change group (<0.20). The values of the minimal important change for surgery and pessary groups were both larger than the smallest detectable change, indicating sufficient responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese version of POP-SS is a reliable and valid instrument and has good sensitivity to change in the population studied.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to translate the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS) into Chinese and validate it in a population of Chinese women. METHODS: The POP-SS questionnaire was translated into simplified Chinese language following an intercultural adaptation procedure. One hundred forty-six patients who met the inclusion criteria were recruited. Among the enrolled patients, 63 underwent surgery for POP and 50 underwent pessary management. They completed the questionnaires at baseline (T1), 1 to 2 weeks later (T2), and 3 months after intervention (T3). Evaluation for psychometric properties was conducted following with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, content validity, criterion validity, construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. RESULTS: The POP-SS was successfully translated into a Chinese version and achieved good content validity. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.796) was good, and test-retest reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.98; P < 0.001). The construct validity was verified by factor analysis and consistent with the theoretical structure of the original questionnaire. The POP-SS score was also significantly correlated with Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.89, P < 0.001). The confirmatory factor analysis identified two factors: physical symptoms and evacuation symptoms. The mean changes among the participants in very much better (9.80 ± 5.36) and much better (5.67 ± 2.99) groups were larger than those among the participants in the no change group (0.43 ± 2.07). The effect size responsiveness parameter in the much better group (>0.80) was larger than that in the no change group (<0.20). The values of the minimal important change for surgery and pessary groups were both larger than the smallest detectable change, indicating sufficient responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese version of POP-SS is a reliable and valid instrument and has good sensitivity to change in the population studied.