Top

01-02-2006 | Original Research Article

Linguistic Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia-Patient Impact Measure (BPH-PIM®)

Published in: Clinical Drug Investigation | Issue 2/2006

Abstract

Background: The Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia-Patient Impact Measure (BPH-PIM®) is a self-reported quality-of-life questionnaire for measuring the impact of urinary/prostate symptoms on the quality of life of patients with BPH. The aim of the present study was to adapt the original instrument to Spanish (for use in Spain) and to assess the psychometric properties of the new version.

Methods: Linguistic adaptation was performed using the standard processes for establishing conceptual equivalence, and was partially conducted in parallel with original instrument development. Psychometric properties were assessed on a sample of 131 patients with BPH who were receiving treatment with doxazosin gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS).

Results: All the standardised items had response rates >99%; there were no floor or ceiling effects. Reliability in terms of Cronbach’s a was 0.96 and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.97. Construct validity was confirmed by factoranalysis. Convergent validity was confirmed in terms of the relationship to the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) [p < 0.001], Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI-3) [p < 0.001] and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) QOL item (p < 0.001). The instrument showed discriminant validity, in terms of IPSS groups (p < 0.001). The instrument was sensitive to change in terms of the correlation of the domain scores of the PIM to improvements in symptom scores (p < 0.001). Significant differences were observed for those who improved ≥3 points in the IPSS scale (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: A psychometric ally valid and conceptually equivalent version of the BPH-PIM questionnaire has been produced in Spanish to be used in Spain in patients with BPH.

Available only for authorised users

Barry MJ, Mulley AG, Fowler FJ, et al. Watchful waiting vs immediate transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatism. JAMA 1988; 259: 3010–7PubMedCrossRef

Mebust WK, Bosch R, Ponova J, et al. Symptom evaluation, quality of life and sexuality. In: The 2nd International Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Paris, June, 1993; SCI, 1994: 129-43

Barry MJ, Fowler JR, O’Leary MP, et al. The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1992; 148: 1549–57PubMed

Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, O’Leary MP. Correlation of the American Urological Symptom Index with self administrated versions of the Madsen Iversen, Boyarsky and Maine Medical Assessment Program Symptom Indexes. J Urol 1992; 148: 1558–63PubMed

O’Connor R. Issues in the measurement of health-related quality of life. Melbourne, Australia: NHMRC National Center for Health Program Evaluation, 1993

Chassany O, Sagnier P, Marquis P, et al. Patient-reported outcomes: the example of health-related quality of life: a European guidance document for the improved integration of health-related quality of life assessment in the drug regulatory process. Drug Inf J 2002; 36: 209–38CrossRef

Nunnally JC, Bernstein IJ. Teoría Psicométrica. 3^a Editión. México: McGraw-Hill, 1995

Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of life: assessment, analysis and interpretation. Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons, 2000

Roehrborn CG, Abbou CC, Allona-Almagro A, et al. BPH: clinical research criteria. In: Denis L, Griffiths K, Khoury S, et al., editors. Proceedings of The 4th International Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Paris, 1997; SCI 1998: 437-514

10.

Lukacs B, Comet D, Grange JC, et al. Construction and validation of a short-form benign prostatic hypertrophy health-related quality-of-life questionnaire. Br J Urol 1997; 80: 722–30PubMedCrossRef

11.

Martin ML, Bushneil DM, Hareendran AV. Psychometric validation of the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patient Impact Measure (BPH-PIM) [abstract no. 1240]. Qual Life Res 2003; 12(7): 826

12.

Denis L, McConnell J, Yoshida O, et al. 4th International Consultation on BPH. Recommendations of the International Scientific Committee: the evaluation and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction. In: Denis L, Griffiths K, Khoury S, et al., editors. Proceedings of The 4th International Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Paris, 1997; SCI 1998: 669-83

13.

Janknegt RA, Chappie CR. Efficacy and safety of the alphal-blocker doxazosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: analysis of 5 studies. Eur Urol 1993; 24: 319–26PubMed

14.

Fulton B, Wagstaff AJ, Sorkin EM. Doxazosin: an update of its clinical pharmacology and therapeutic applications in hypertension and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Drugs 1995; 49(2): 295–320PubMedCrossRef

15.

Chung M, Vashi V, Puente J, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of doxazosin in a controlled-release gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) formulation. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 48: 678–87PubMedCrossRef

16.

Vela R, Martin JM, Calahorra FJ, et al. Validación cultural y lingüística en castellano del baremo internacional de síntomas prostáticos (I-PSS). Actas Urol Esp 1994; 18(8): 841–7

17.

Ware J, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary test of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34: 220–33PubMedCrossRef

18.

Vilagut G, Ferrer M, Rajmil L, et al. El cuestionario de salud SF-36 español: una década de experiencia y nuevos desarrollos. Gaceta Sanitaria 2005; 19(2): 135–50PubMedCrossRef

19.

Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, et al. Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 7(6): 490–502PubMedCrossRef

20.

Ruiz M, Rejas J, Soto J, et al. Adaptación y validación del Health Utilities Index Mark 3 al castellano y baremos de correctión en la población española. Med Clin (Barc) 2003; 120(3): 89–96CrossRef

21.

Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 622–9PubMed

22.

Higginson IJ, Carr AJ. Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. BMJ 2001; 322: 1297–300PubMedCrossRef

23.

Kirby R, Altwein JE, Bartsch G, et al. Results of the PREDICT (Prospective European Doxazosin and Combination Therapy) trial [abstract no. 1028]. J Urol 1999, 161 Suppl. 266

24.

Boyle P, Altwein JE, Bartsch G, et al. Patient perceptions of the effect of medical therapy for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) in the PREDICT trial [abstract no. 1029]. J Urol 1999; 161 Suppl.: 266CrossRef

25.

Bosch JL, Hop WC, Kirkels WJ, et al. The International Prostate Symptom Score in a community-based simple of men between 55 and 74 years of age: prevalence and correlation of symptoms with age, prostate volume, flow rate and residual urine volume. J Urol 1995; 75: 622–30CrossRef

26.

Hays RD, Woolley JM. The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality of life research. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 18(5): 419–23PubMedCrossRef

Title: Linguistic Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia-Patient Impact Measure (BPH-PIM®)
Publication date: 01-02-2006
Published in: Clinical Drug Investigation / Issue 2/2006
Print ISSN: 1173-2563
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1918
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00044011-200626020-00005

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Linguistic Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia-Patient Impact Measure (BPH-PIM®)

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content