Schwartz Monica Maria, Ljosaa Tone Marte, Pukstad Brita Solveig, Utvær Britt Karin
Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Surgical Department, Namsos Hospital, Nord-Trøndelag Health Trust, Namsos, Norway.
Int Wound J. 2025 May;22(5):e70051. doi: 10.1111/iwj.70051.
The aim of the study was to explore the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Wound-quality of life (QoL)-17. We included 204 patients with hard-to-heal wounds on the lower extremity. Patients filled out the Wound-QoL-17, SF-36 and Patients' Global Impression of Change at three time points over 14 weeks. Clinical and demographical data were collected at baseline. Wound severity was collected at baseline and 14 weeks follow-up (T2). Confirmatory factor analyses showed acceptable fit of the hypothesised three-factor model (i.e., body, psyche and everyday life) of the Wound-QoL as long as we accepted two correlated error terms within the Body factor (χ = 203.14, p = 0.000, df = 99, χ/df = 2.05, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.072, Standardised Root Mean Square Residual = 0.059, Comparative Fit Index = 0.943 and Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.930). Correlation showed moderate to strong associations between Wound-QoL and SF-36 (-0.400** to -0.777**), and significant associations between Wound-QoL and Patients' Global Impression of Change (0.199*), general wound pain intensity (0.435**), pain intensity at wound change (0.340**) and infection (0.174*). The intraclass correlations, ranging from 0.578** to 0.782**, suggested strong test-retest reliability. Cronbach's alphas for all subscales and the total score between 0.748 and 0.922, indicated good internal consistency. The Norwegian version of Wound-QoL demonstrates good reliability and construct validity and is suitable for evaluating QoL in patients with hard-to-heal wounds. However, some improvements were performed to achieve an acceptable fit.
本研究的目的是探讨挪威版伤口生活质量(QoL)-17的心理测量特性。我们纳入了204例下肢难愈合伤口患者。患者在14周内的三个时间点填写了伤口QoL-17、SF-36和患者整体变化印象量表。在基线时收集临床和人口统计学数据。在基线和14周随访(T2)时收集伤口严重程度。验证性因素分析表明,只要我们接受身体因素内的两个相关误差项,伤口QoL的假设三因素模型(即身体、心理和日常生活)就具有可接受的拟合度(χ=203.14,p=0.000,df=99,χ/df=2.05,近似均方根误差=0.072,标准化均方根残差=0.059,比较拟合指数=0.943,塔克-刘易斯指数=0.930)。相关性分析显示,伤口QoL与SF-36之间存在中度至强关联(-0.400至-0.777),伤口QoL与患者整体变化印象(0.199*)、一般伤口疼痛强度(0.435**)、伤口变化时的疼痛强度(0.340**)和感染(0.174*)之间存在显著关联。组内相关性在0.578至0.782之间,表明重测信度较高。所有子量表和总分的克朗巴哈α系数在0.748至0.922之间,表明内部一致性良好。挪威版伤口QoL具有良好的信度和结构效度,适用于评估难愈合伤口患者的生活质量。然而,为了达到可接受的拟合度,我们进行了一些改进。