Utomo Elaine, Blok Bertil F, Steensma Anneke B, Korfage Ida J
Department of Urology, Erasmus Medical Center, Room Na-1708, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands,
Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Apr;25(4):531-44. doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2263-z. Epub 2014 Jan 21.
The objective of this study was to validate the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) in Dutch women.
Patients with pelvic floor dysfunction completed the Dutch questionnaires at (1) inclusion to evaluate internal consistency, (2) 1 week later to assess test-retest reliability, and (3) 6 months later to assess responsiveness and interpretability of change. To assess validity, floor and ceiling effects and construct validity were tested. A population-based sample (reference group) completed the questionnaires once.
Data of 111 patients and 283 reference group participants were analyzed. Internal consistency of baseline scores in patient and reference groups was moderate (Cronbach's alpha 0.52-0.60) to adequate in the PFDI-20 (Cronbach's alpha 0.71-0.84) and adequate in the PFIQ-7 (Cronbach's alpha 0.88-0.94). Both measures presented adequate test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.79-0.91) and adequate responsiveness (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve both 0.77). Interpretability was adequate for PFDI-20 and acceptable for PFIQ-7 with a clinically relevant minimally important change of -23 and -29 points, respectively. At baseline, the scales of the PFIQ-7 showed floor effects (44-55 %) in patients, though the PFIQ-7 summary score did not. No ceiling effects were observed. Construct validity was adequate with all predefined hypotheses confirmed regarding subgroup discrimination using pooled patient and reference group baseline data.
For assessing distress and health-related quality of life of pelvic floor dysfunction, the Dutch PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 are reliable and valid in the general Dutch population, and also responsive and interpretable among tertiary care-seeking women.
本研究的目的是验证荷兰女性的盆底困扰量表(PFDI - 20)和盆底影响问卷(PFIQ - 7)。
盆底功能障碍患者在(1)纳入研究时完成荷兰语问卷以评估内部一致性,(2)1周后评估重测信度,以及(3)6个月后评估变化的反应性和可解释性。为评估效度,测试了地板效应和天花板效应以及结构效度。一个基于人群的样本(参照组)完成问卷一次。
分析了111例患者和283名参照组参与者的数据。患者组和参照组基线分数的内部一致性在PFDI - 20中为中等(Cronbach's α 0.52 - 0.60)至良好(Cronbach's α 0.71 - 0.84),在PFIQ - 7中为良好(Cronbach's α 0.88 - 0.94)。两种测量方法均表现出良好的重测信度(组内相关系数0.79 - 0.91)和良好的反应性(受试者工作特征曲线下面积均为0.77)。PFDI - 20的可解释性良好,PFIQ - 7的可解释性可接受,临床相关的最小重要变化分别为 - 23分和 - 29分。在基线时,PFIQ - 7的量表在患者中显示出地板效应(44% - 55%),尽管PFIQ - 7的总分未显示。未观察到天花板效应。使用合并的患者组和参照组基线数据进行亚组区分时,所有预定义假设均得到证实,结构效度良好。
对于评估盆底功能障碍的困扰和与健康相关的生活质量,荷兰语版的PFDI - 20和PFIQ - 7在荷兰普通人群中是可靠且有效的,在寻求三级医疗服务的女性中也具有反应性和可解释性。