Advertisement

Turkish translation of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire: validity and reliability

  • Seyda Toprak CelenayEmail author
  • Ozge Coban
  • Cansu Sahbaz Pirincci
  • Zehra Korkut
  • Tugba Birben
  • Afra Alkan
  • Ayse Filiz Avsar
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

To translate the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ) into Turkish and test its validity and reliability.

Methods

The study included 341 women. The translation of the PIKQ, which comprised of the urinary incontinence (PIKQ-UI) and pelvic organ prolapse (PIKQ-POP) sections, was performed in accordance with international recommendations. The Incontinence Quiz (IQ) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were applied to assess the level of knowledge about POP and UI. Psychometric analyses consisted of assessing the following: (1) construct validity by confirmatory factor analysis, (2) criterion and known group validity, (3) internal consistency reliability by the KR-20 coefficient, and (4) test-retest reliability over 1 week with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results

All fit indices except the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual indicated acceptable fit for the final models. Criterion validity was supported by moderate correlations between the PIKQ-UI and the IQ (rho = 0.679, p < 0.001). There were positive and weak linear correlations between the PIKQ-UI and PIKQ-POP scores and their corresponding perceived knowledge scores (rho = 0.351, p = 0.013 and rho = 0.345, p = 0.014, respectively). The known group validity did not show differences indicating that participants did not have enough knowledge about UI and/or POP even when they had the condition or acquaintance with them (p = 0.852 and p = 0.185, respectively). Reliability was excellent as indicated by the ICCs of 0.91–0.90, and KR-20 of 0.67–0.75 indicated good internal consistency for the PIKQ-UI and PIKQ-POP, respectively.

Conclusions

The Turkish version of the PIKQ is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the knowledge of UI and POP.

Keywords

Pelvic floor dysfunction Prolapse and incontinence knowledge questionnaire Validity Reliability 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Raizada V, Mittal RK. Pelvic floor anatomy and applied physiology. Gastroenterol Clin N Am. 2008;37(3):493–vii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hodges PW, Sapsford R, Pengel LH. Postural and respiratory functions of the pelvic floor muscles. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(3):362–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wu JM, Vaughan CP, Goode PS, Redden DT, Burgio KL, Richter HE, et al. Prevalence and trends of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(1):141–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davis K, Kumar D. Pelvic floor dysfunction: a conceptual framework for collaborative patient-centred care. J Adv Nurs. 2003;43(6):555–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jundt K, Peschers U, Kentenich H. The investigation and treatment of female pelvic floor dysfunction. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(33–34):564–74.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shaw C, Tansey R, Jackson C, Hyde C, Allan R. Barriers to help seeking in people with urinary symptoms. J Fam Pract. 2001;18(1):48–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mitteness LS. Knowledge and beliefs about urinary incontinence in adulthood and old age. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1990;38(3):374–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    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(1):103–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Branch LG, Walker LA, Wetle TT, DuBeau CE, Resnick NM. Urinary incontinence knowledge among community-dwelling people 65 years of age and older. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42(12):1257–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shah AD, Massagli MP, Kohli N, Rajan SS, Braaten KP, Hoyte L. A reliable, valid instrument to assess patient knowledge about urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(9):1283–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Comrey AL, Backer TE, Glaser EMA. Sourcebook for mental health measures. Oxford. Oxford: Human Interaction Research Institue; 1973.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kara KC, Citak Karakaya I, Tunali N, Karakaya MG. Reliability and validity of the incontinence quiz-Turkish version. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;44(1):144–50.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall, CRC press; 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lukacz ES, Lawrence JM, Burchette RJ, Luber KM, Nager CW, Buckwalter JG. The use of visual analog scale in urogynecologic research: a psychometric evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(1):165–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lt H, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marsh HW, Hocevar D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychol Bull. 1985;97(3):562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Berzuk K, Shay B. Effect of increasing awareness of pelvic floor muscle function on pelvic floor dysfunction: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(6):837–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liebergall-Wischnitzer M, Cnaan T, Hochner H, Paltiel O. Self-reported prevalence of and knowledge about urinary incontinence among community-dwelling Israeli women of child-bearing age. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2015;42(4):401–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Richter LA, Gutman RE, Tefera E, Estep A, Iglesia CB. Knowledge of erectile dysfunction and pelvic floor disorders among young adults: a cross-sectional study. Can J Urol. 2015;22(2):7715–9.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tinsley HE, Tinsley DJ. Uses of factor analysis in counseling psychology research. J Couns Psychol. 1987;34(4):414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis. Abingdon: Psychology Press; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Comrey AL. Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56(5):754–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dunivan GC, Anger JT, Alas A, Wieslander C, Sevilla C, Chu S, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse: a disease of silence and shame. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(6):322–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chutka DS, Fleming KC, Evans MP, Evans JM, Andrews KL. Urinary incontinence in the elderly population. Mayo Clin Proc. 1996;71(1):93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abrams P, Andersson KE, Birder L, Brubaker L, Cardozo L, Chapple C, 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(1):213–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Salvucci S, Walter E, Conley V, Fink S, Saba M. Measurement error studies at the National Center for education statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; 1997.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health Science, Department of Physical Therapy and RehabilitationAnkara Yildirim Beyazit UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Clinic of Physical Therapy and RehabilitationAtaturk Training and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  3. 3.Vocational School of Health Services, Department of Therapy and RehabilitationKTO Karatay UniversityKonyaTurkey
  4. 4.Guneysu Vocational School of Physical Therapy and RehabilitationRecep Tayyip Erdogan UniversityRizeTurkey
  5. 5.Faculty of Medicine, Department of BiostatisticsAnkara Yildirim Beyazit UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  6. 6.Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyAnkara Yildirim Beyazit UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations