Elfriede Greimel1, Eva Nagele2, Anne Lanceley3, Anne S Oberguggenberger4, Andy Nordin5, Karin Kuljanic6, Juan I Arraras7, Chie Wei-Chu8, Pernille T Jensen9, Krzysztof A Tomaszewski10, Carien L Creutzberg11, Razvan Galalae12, Hilde Toelen13, Kristin Zimmermann14, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic15, Anna Costantini16, Thierry Almont17, Samantha Serpentini18, Ligita Paskeviciute Frøding19, Ingvild Vistad20, Claudia Schmalz21. 1. Medical University of Graz, Graz Austria. Electronic address: elfriede.greimel@medunigraz.at. 2. Medical University of Graz, Graz Austria. 3. University College London, London, United Kingdom. 4. Medical University of Innsbruck, Austria. 5. East Kent Hospitals University Foundation NHS Trust, Kent, United Kingdom. 6. Clinical Unversity Hospital Centre Rijeka, Croatia. 7. Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 8. Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taiwan. 9. Department of Gynecology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. 10. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Kraków University, Kraków, Poland; Scanmed St. Raphael Hospital, Kraków, Poland. 11. Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden, Netherlands. 12. Evangelische Kliniken Gelsenkirchen GmbH, Gelsenkirchen, Germany. 13. University Hospitals Leuven, UZ Campus Gasthuisberg, Belgium. 14. Bundeswehrzentralkrankenhaus Koblenz, Klinik für Urologie, Koblenz, Germany. 15. Helios University Clinic, University Witten/Herdecke, Wuppertal, Germany. 16. Psychoncology Unit, Sant'Andrea Universitary Hospital, Rome, Italy. 17. Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse, France. 18. Unit of Psycho-oncology/Breast Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Padova, Italy. 19. Department of Gynecology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark. 20. Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway. 21. Department for Radiation Oncology, University Clinic Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group developed a questionnaire to assess sexual health in patients with cancer and cancer survivors. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. METHODS: The 22-item EORTC sexual health questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-SH22) was administered with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to 444 patients with cancer. The hypothesised scale structure, reliability and validity were evaluated through standardised psychometric procedures. RESULTS: The cross-cultural field study showed that the majority of patients (94.7%) were able to complete the QLQ-SH22 in less than 20 min; 89% of the study participants did not need any help to fill in the questionnaire. Multi-item multi-trait scaling analysis confirmed the hypothesised scale structure with two multi-item scales (sexual satisfaction, sexual pain) and 11 single items (including five conditional items and four gender-specific items). The internal consistency yielded acceptable Cronbach's alpha coefficients (.90 for the sexual satisfaction scale, .80 for the sexual pain scale). The test-retest correlations (Pearson's r) ranged from .70 to .93 except for the scale communication with professionals (.67) and male body image (.69). The QLQ-SH22 discriminates well between subgroups of patients differing in terms of their performance and treatment status. CONCLUSION: The study supports the reliability, the content and construct validity of the QLQ-SH22. The newly developed questionnaire is clinically applicable to assess sexual health of patients with cancer at different treatment stages and during survivorship for clinical trials and for clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group developed a questionnaire to assess sexual health in patients with cancer and cancer survivors. This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. METHODS: The 22-item EORTC sexual health questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-SH22) was administered with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to 444 patients with cancer. The hypothesised scale structure, reliability and validity were evaluated through standardised psychometric procedures. RESULTS: The cross-cultural field study showed that the majority of patients (94.7%) were able to complete the QLQ-SH22 in less than 20 min; 89% of the study participants did not need any help to fill in the questionnaire. Multi-item multi-trait scaling analysis confirmed the hypothesised scale structure with two multi-item scales (sexual satisfaction, sexual pain) and 11 single items (including five conditional items and four gender-specific items). The internal consistency yielded acceptable Cronbach's alpha coefficients (.90 for the sexual satisfaction scale, .80 for the sexual pain scale). The test-retest correlations (Pearson's r) ranged from .70 to .93 except for the scale communication with professionals (.67) and male body image (.69). The QLQ-SH22 discriminates well between subgroups of patients differing in terms of their performance and treatment status. CONCLUSION: The study supports the reliability, the content and construct validity of the QLQ-SH22. The newly developed questionnaire is clinically applicable to assess sexual health of patients with cancer at different treatment stages and during survivorship for clinical trials and for clinical practice.
Authors: Severin Alexander Rossi; Camille de Schoulepnikoff; David Guillier; Wassim Raffoul; Pietro Giovanni di Summa Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-09-13