Abstract
Background
Up to 90 % of patients undergoing low anterior resection complain of increased daily bowel movements, urgency, and a variable degree of incontinence. A symptom-based scoring system for bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer has recently been developed and validated. The aim of our study was to adapt the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) scale questionnaire to the Lithuanian language, and assess its psychometric properties.
Methods
The LARS questionnaire was translated into Lithuanian by the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust using a standard procedure of double-back translation. The Lithuanian version of the LARS (LARS-LT) questionnaire was completed by 111 patients who underwent low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision in the period from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2012, at the National Cancer Institute. An anchor question from the Wexner score assessing the impact of bowel function on lifestyle was included. A subgroup of 20 patients completed the LARS-LT questionnaire twice. Validity was tested using a factor analysis, and internal reliability was estimated using the Cronbach’s alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients.
Results
Twenty-seven patients (25 %) had no LARS, 26 (24 %) had minor LARS, and 55 (56 %) had major LARS. The response rate was 60.7 %. The LARS-LT showed significantly high reliability and internal consistency [Cronbach’s α = 0.88, interclass correlation coefficient—0.86 (0.71–0.98)]. The LARS score showed significant correlations with the lifestyle question (p < 0.05). It could not detect differences between female and male patient groups (p = 0.33), patients’ age (p = 0.45), patients who had/had not undergone radiation therapy (p = 0.07), and those in whom the distal edge of the tumor was close to or far from the anal verge (p = 0.17).
Conclusions
The Lithuanian version of the LARS-LT shows acceptable psychometric properties and can be considered a valuable and specific instrument to assess bowel function in rectal cancer patients, both for research purposes and in clinical practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bryant CLC, Lunniss PJ, Knowles CH, Thaha MA, Chan CLH (2012) Anterior resection syndrome. Lancet Oncol 13:403–408
Efthimiadis C, Basdanis G, Zatagias A et al (2004) Manometric and clinical evaluation of patients after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol 8:205–207
Kakodkar R, Gupta S, Nundy S (2006) Low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: functional assessment and factors affecting outcome. Colorectal Dis 8:650–656
Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH (2012) A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 19:2485–2493
Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S (2012) Low anterior resection syndrome score: development and validation of a symptom-based scoring system for bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 255:922–928
Juu T, Ahlberg M, Biondo S et al (2014) International validation of the low anterior resection syndrome score. Ann Surg 259:728–734
Hou X-T, Pang D, Lu Q et al (2015) Validation of the Chinese version of the low anterior resection syndrome score for measuring bowel dysfunction after sphincter-preserving surgery among rectal cancer patients. Eur J Oncol Nurs 19:495–501
Juul T, Battersby NJ, Christensen P et al (2015) Validation of the English translation of the low anterior resection syndrome score (The LARS score). Colorectal Dis 17:908–916
Jorge JM, Wexner SD (1993) Etiology and management of faecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97
Laforest A, Bretagnol F, Mouazan AS, Maggiori L, Ferron M, Panis Y (2012) Functional disorders after rectal cancer resection: does a rehabilitation programme improve anal continence and quality of life? Colorectal Dis 14:1231–1237
Contin P, Kulu Y, Bruckner T et al (2014) Comparative analysis of late functional outcome following preoperative radiation therapy or chemoradiotherapy and surgery or surgery alone in rectal cancer cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:165–175
Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW et al (1999) Patient and surgeon ranking of the severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence: the fecal incontinence severity index. Dis Colon Rectum 42:1525–1532
Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA (1999) Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut 44:77–80
Temple LK, Bacik J, Savatta SG et al (2005) The development of a validated instrument to evaluate bowel function after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1353–1365
Pitman EJG (1948) Notes on nonparametric statistical inference (mimeographed). Columbia Univ, New York
Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334
Streiner DL, Norman GR (2008) Health measurement scales, a practical guide to their development and use, 4th edn. Oxford University, Oxford
Bregendahl S, Emmertsen KJ, Lous J, Laurberg S (2013) Bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection with and without neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: a population-based cross-sectional study. Colorectal Dis 15:1130–1139
Franco-Neto PR, de Queiroz FL, Staino IRFL, Filho AL (2013) Quality of life assessment in the late postoperative period of patients with rectal cancer submitted to total mesorectal excision. J Coloproctol 33:50–57
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Samalavicius, N.E., Dulskas, A., Lasinskas, M. et al. Validity and reliability of a Lithuanian version of low anterior resection syndrome score. Tech Coloproctol 20, 215–220 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-015-1424-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-015-1424-0