Top

Published in:

01-07-2017 | Original Article

Norwegian translation, and validation, of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)

Authors: Catherine J. Teig, Margreth Grotle, Malcolm J. Bond, Cecilia A. C. Prinsen, Marie A. Ellström Engh, Milada S. Cvancarova, Møyfrid Kjøllesdal, Angelita Martini

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 7/2017

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The goal was to translate into Norwegian, and validate, short versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) using a sample of women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction.

Methods

Modified European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Guidelines were used for translation and cultural adaptation. Of 212 eligible Norwegian women who consented to participate, 205 completed the questionnaires, of whom 50 were retested after 1 – 3 weeks, and 76 were tested 6 months after surgery. Reliability, validity and responsiveness were evaluated. Additionally, interpretability, the smallest detectable change, the standard error of measurement, floor and ceiling effects, and the percentages of missing items are reported.

Results

Reliability ranged from 0.66 to 0.93 and intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.85 to 0.94. Both construct validity and responsiveness were found to be adequate. The responsiveness of the PFDI-20 was further supported by areas under the curve above 0.70. Estimates were lower for the PFIQ-7. The smallest detectable changes at the individual level were 15 – 21 % and 17 – 27 % for the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7, respectively. The absolute values of the minimal important changes in the total scores were 48 and 47, respectively. No floor or ceiling effects were evident in the distributions of the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 total scores.

Conclusions

The translated questionnaires provided adequate reliability, validity and good responsiveness to change. These short versions of the PFDI and PFIQ are robust measuring instruments that will enable symptom severity and health-related quality of life to be evaluated in the Norwegian context.

Available only for authorised users

Based on a sensation of a bulge in the pelvic area (i.e. PFDI-20 )

Based on lower urinary tract symptoms (i.e. PFDI-20 )

Based on bowel symptoms (i.e. PFDI-20) .

Abrams P, Andersson KE, Birder L, et al. Fourth International Consultation on Incontinence Recommendations of the International Scientific Committee: evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29:213–240. doi:10.1002/nau.20870.CrossRefPubMed

Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300:1311–1316. doi:10.1001/jama.300.11.1311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC. Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:1388–1395. doi:10.1067/mob.2001.118659.CrossRefPubMed

Barber MD, Chen Z, Lukacz E, et al. Further validation of the short form versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ). Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:541–546. doi:10.1002/nau.20934.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:103–113. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025.CrossRefPubMed

Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A. Incontinence. 5th ed. Paris: Health Publication; 2013.

Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, Jakobsson U. Validation of the Swedish short forms of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/and Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011;90:483–487. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01085.x.CrossRefPubMed

Kaplan PB, Sut N, Sut HK. Validation, cultural adaptation and responsiveness of two pelvic-floor-specific quality-of-life questionnaires, PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7, in a Turkish population. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;162:229–233. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.03.004.CrossRefPubMed

Utomo E, Blok BF, Steensma AB, Korfage IJ. Validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) in a Dutch population. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:531–544. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2263-z.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Dewolf L, Koller M, Velikova G, et al. EORTC Quality of Life Group Translation Procedure. 3rd ed. Brussels: EORTC; 2009.

11.

Dalkey NC. The Delphi method: an experimental study of group opinion. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation; 1969.

12.

Boulkedid R, Abdoul H, Loustau M, Sibony O, Alberti C. Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6, e20476. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020476.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–3191. doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Bump R, Mattiasson A, Bø K, Brubaker L, DeLancey JOL, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175:10–17. doi:10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70243-0.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Gandek B, Ware Jr JE, Aaronson NK, et al. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the SF-36 in eleven countries: results from the IQOLA Project. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1149–1158. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00106-1.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Maruish ME, editor. User’s manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey. 3rd ed. Lincoln: QualityMetric; 2001.

18.

de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.CrossRef

19.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:539–549. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–745. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.

22.

Gelhorn HL, Coyne KS, Sikirica V, Gauld J, Murphy M. Psychometric evaluation of health-related quality-of-life measures after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18:221–226. doi:10.1097/SPV.0b013e31825e6707.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L. Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:523–528. doi:10.1007/s00192-009-1069-5.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Due U, Brostrøm S, Lose G. Validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 in Danish women with pelvic organ prolapse. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92:1041–1048. doi:10.1111/aogs.12189.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Rogers RG, Rockwood TH, Constantine ML, et al. A new measure of sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFD): the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:1091–1103. doi:10.1007/s00192-012-2020-8.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Handa VL, Barber MD, Young SB, et al. Paper versus web-based administration of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7. Int Urogynecol J. 2008;19:1331–1335. doi:10.1007/s00192-008-0651-6.CrossRef

Title: Norwegian translation, and validation, of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)
Authors: Catherine J. Teig
Margreth Grotle
Malcolm J. Bond
Cecilia A. C. Prinsen
Marie A. Ellström Engh
Milada S. Cvancarova
Møyfrid Kjøllesdal
Angelita Martini
Publication date: 01-07-2017
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 7/2017
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3209-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Norwegian translation, and validation, of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2017

Long-term outcomes of intravesical dimethyl sulfoxide/heparin/hydrocortisone therapy for interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome

Accuracy and precision of a new portable ultrasound scanner, the Biocon-700, in residual urine volume measurement

Spontaneous transvaginal ileum evisceration: a case report

Vaginal vault suspension during hysterectomy for benign indications: a prospective register study of agreement on terminology and surgical procedure

Urogynecology digest

Recurrence risk is associated with preoperatively advanced prolapse stage: Is there a difference between women with stage 2 and those with stage 3 or 4 cystocele?