Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Validation of the Thai version of the obstetric quality of recovery score (obsqor-10-Thai) after elective cesarean delivery

Authors: Sasima Dusitkasem, Jinda Jindapitak, Vanlapa Arnuntasupakul, Varinee Lekprasert, Sommart Bumrungphuet, Chakrit Sukying, Rojnarin Komonhirun, Lisa Sangkum

Published in: BMC Anesthesiology | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Background

The Obstetric Quality of Recovery score (ObsQoR-10) is a questionnaire used to assess recovery after cesarean delivery. However, the original ObsQoR-10 is in English and was mainly validated in the Western population. We therefore evaluated the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the ObsQoR-10-Thai in patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery.

Methods

The original ObsQoR-10 was translated into Thai, and psychometric validation was performed to evaluate the quality of post-cesarean recovery. The ObsQoR-10-Thai, activities of daily living checklist, and 100-mm visual analog scale of global health (VAS-GH) questionnaires were administered to the study participants before and 24 and 48-h postpartum. Validity, reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility of the ObsQoR-10-Thai were assessed.

Results

We included 110 patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery. The mean ObsQoR-10-Thai score at baseline and 24 and 48-h postpartum was 83.35 ± 11.15, 56.75 ± 11.6, and 70.96 ± 13.65, respectively. The ObsQoR-10-Thai score differed significantly between the two groups divided based on the VAS-GH (≥ 70 vs. < 70): 75.58 ± 13.81 and 52.56 ± 10.61, respectively (P < 0.001). The convergent validity between the ObsQoR-10-Thai and VAS-GH was good (r = 0.60, P < 0.001). The ObsQoR-10-Thai displayed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87), split-half reliability (0.92), and test–retest reliability (0.99, 95% CI: 0.98–0.99). The median time to complete the questionnaire was 2 (IQR, 1–6) min.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that the ObsQoR-10-Thai is valid and has good reliability, with a high degree of responsiveness in terms of assessment of recovery after elective cesarean delivery.

Trial registration

This study was registered on the Thai Clinical Trials Registry, identifier TCTR20210204001, registered on 04/02/2021 (Prospectively registration).

Available only for authorised users

Gibbons L, Belizán J, Lauer J, Betrán A, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The Global Numbers and Costs of Additionally Needed and Unnecessary Caesarean Sections Performed per Year: Overuse as a Barrier to Universal Coverage HEALTH SYSTEMS FINANCING. World Health Report. 2010;2010:30.

Myles PS, Weitkamp B, Jones K, Melick J, Hensen S. Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(1):11–5.CrossRefPubMed

Stark PA, Myles PS, Burke JA. Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-15. Anesthesiology. 2013;118(6):1332–40.CrossRefPubMed

Triviño-Juárez JM, Romero-Ayuso D, Nieto-Pereda B, Forjaz MJ, Criado-Álvarez JJ, Arruti-Sevilla B, et al. Health related quality of life of women at the sixth week and sixth month postpartum by mode of birth. Women and birth : J Austral Coll Mid. 2017;30(1):29–39.CrossRef

Ciechanowicz S, Setty T, Robson E, Sathasivam C, Chazapis M, Dick J, et al. Development and evaluation of an obstetric quality-of-recovery score (ObsQoR-11) after elective Caesarean delivery. Br J Anaesth. 2019;122(1):69–78.CrossRefPubMed

Sultan P, Kormendy F, Nishimura S, Carvalho B, Guo N, Papageorgiou C. Comparison of spontaneous versus operative vaginal delivery using Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10): An observational cohort study. J Clin Anesth. 2020;63:109781.CrossRefPubMed

Ciechanowicz S, Howle R, Heppolette C, Nakhjavani B, Carvalho B, Sultan P. Evaluation of the Obstetric Quality-of-Recovery score (ObsQoR-11) following non-elective caesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019;39:51–9.CrossRefPubMed

Sultan P, Kamath N, Carvalho B, Bansal P, Elkhateb R, Dougan S, et al. Evaluation of inpatient postpartum recovery using the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 patient-reported outcome measure: a single-center observational study. Am J obstetr gynecol MFM. 2020;2(4):100202.CrossRef

Shalev S, Orbach-Zinger S, Sultan P, Guo N, Ronel I, Davis A, et al. Obstetric quality of recovery scoring tool: assessment of validity, reliability and feasibility in an Israeli cesarean delivery population. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2020;44:51.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kang R, Lee S, Lee E, Cho YJ, Jeong JS, Choi SJ, et al. Validation and clinical utility of the Korean version of the obstetric quality-of-recovery score (ObsQoR-11) following elective cesarean section: a prospective observational cohort study. Diagnostics. 2022; 12(2):291. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12020291

11.

Kumar S, Ashok V, Jain D, Arora A, Singh A, Sikka P. Validation of an obstetric quality of recovery scoring tool (ObsQoR-11) after elective caesarean delivery in a developing country: a prospective observational study. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2022;49: 103235.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Kozanhan B, Yıldız M, Polat A, Günenç O, Tutar SM, İyisoy MS, et al. Development and Validation of a Turkish Version of Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2022;50(5):366–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Mathias L, Carlos RV, Siaulys MM, Gabriades P, Guo N, Domingue B, et al. Development and validation of a Portuguese version of Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10-Portuguese). Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine. 2022;41(3): 101085.CrossRef

14.

Sharawi N, Klima L, Shah R, Blake L, Carvalho B, Sultan P. Evaluation of patient-reported outcome measures of functional recovery following caesarean section: a systematic review using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Anaesthesia. 2019;74(11):1439–55.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Sultan P, Sharawi N, Blake L, Ando K, Sultan E, Aghaeepour N, et al. Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(5): e2111600.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg (London, England). 2014;12(12):1495–9.CrossRef

17.

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186–91.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Elbarazi I, Devlin NJ, Katsaiti MS, Papadimitropoulos EA, Shah KK, Blair I. The effect of religion on the perception of health states among adults in the United Arab Emirates: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(10): e016969.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Feng Y, Herdman M, van Nooten F, Cleeland C, Parkin D, Ikeda S, et al. An exploration of differences between Japan and two European countries in the self-reporting and valuation of pain and discomfort on the EQ-5D. Qual life res : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2017;26(8):2067–78.CrossRef

20.

Goren A, Mould-Quevedo J, daCosta DM. Prevalence of pain reporting and associated health outcomes across emerging markets and developed countries. Pain med (Malden, Mass). 2014;15(11):1880–91.CrossRef

21.

Lee L, Tran T, Mayo NE, Carli F, Feldman LS. What does it really mean to “recover” from an operation? Surgery. 2014;155(2):211–6.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Sultan P, George R, Weiniger CF, El-Boghdadly K, Pandal P, Carvalho B. CRADLE Study Investigators. Expert Consensus Regarding Core Outcomes for Enhanced Recovery after Cesarean Delivery Studies: A Delphi Study. Anesthesiology. 2022;137(2):201–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000004263. (PMID: 35511169).CrossRefPubMed

Title: Validation of the Thai version of the obstetric quality of recovery score (obsqor-10-Thai) after elective cesarean delivery
Authors: Sasima Dusitkasem
Jinda Jindapitak
Vanlapa Arnuntasupakul
Varinee Lekprasert
Sommart Bumrungphuet
Chakrit Sukying
Rojnarin Komonhirun
Lisa Sangkum
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Anesthesiology / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2253
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02010-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Validation of the Thai version of the obstetric quality of recovery score (obsqor-10-Thai) after elective cesarean delivery

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Bicarbonate ringer’s solution could improve the intraoperative acid-base equilibrium and reduce hepatocellular enzyme levels after deceased donor liver transplantation: a randomized controlled study

Airway management for a patient with tracheobronchomegaly undergoing lobectomy: a case report

Effect of remimazolam versus propofol for the induction of general anesthesia on cerebral blood flow and oxygen saturation in elderly patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy

Total intravenous anesthesia decreases hospital stay but not incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications after lung resection surgery: a propensity score matching study

Tarlov cyst with self-healing cauda equina syndrome following combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: a case report

Plasma indole-3-aldehyde as a novel biomarker of acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: a reanalysis using prospective metabolomic data