Clinical Rheumatology

, Volume 32, Issue 11, pp 1585–1592 | Cite as

Validation of the Portuguese version of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) in Brazilian women with postmenopausal osteoporosis with vertebral fracture

  • Néville de Oliveira Ferreira
  • Michael Arthuso
  • Raimunda Beserra da Silva
  • Aarão Mendes Pinto-Neto
  • Lúcia Costa-Paiva
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

To validate the Portuguese version of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) in Brazilian women with osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VF). A questionnaire validation study of 86 postmenopausal women was conducted. Women were divided into two groups: 43 in a group with VF and 43 in a group without osteoporosis, age-matched (±3 years). The QUALEFFO-41 questionnaire was administered twice in 4 weeks and compared to a generic questionnaire SF-36. For analysis of the QUALEFFO-41, internal consistency, repeatability, and discriminant capacity between VF patients and control patients were assessed. The significance level adopted was 5 %. The mean age of the women was 66.1 ± 7.2 years for the group with VF and 64.9 ± 6.3 years for the control group (p = 0.4259). The QUALEFFO showed adequate internal consistency in all domains (Cronbach's α of 0.74 to 0.84) and good repeatability (ICC of domains = 0.67–0.90). Of the total questions, 92.6 % demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity, and 95 % of the questions showed good discriminant validity. The mean scores of both questionnaires were significantly higher in the group with VF. There was a good correlation among the QUALEFFO-41 domains and their corresponding SF-36 domains, except for social function. All QUALEFFO-41 domains were significantly predictive of VF on assessment of the ROC curve. The Portuguese version of the QUALEFFO-41 may be used in Brazilian women with osteoporotic VF because it shows good reliability, repeatability, and validity. It was also shown to impair quality of life (QOL) in women with VF and had good ability to discriminate QOL in women with osteoporotic VF.

Keywords

Postmenopausal osteoporosis QUALEFFO-41 Quality of life Spinal fractures Validation studies 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Fundo de Apoio ao Ensino e a Pesquisa(FAEPEX)—Unicamp (Process number 237/07 and 168/09) for providing financial support for the project. We also wish to thank the Radiology Division, in special thanks to Dr Nelson Caserta, for facilitating the performance of X-rays in the patients studied, the team of rheumatology outpatient facility of the Clinics Hospital (in special to Dr João Francisco Marques Neto), and the team of gynecologists and physical therapists at Women's Integrated Healthcare Center (CAISM) for making space available to carry out the study.

Disclosure

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Cummings SR, Melton LJ (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359:1761–1767. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08657-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reginster JY, Burlet N (2006) Osteoporosis: a still increasing prevalence. Bone 38:S4–S9. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2005.11.024 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cole ZA, Dennison EM, Cooper C (2008) Osteoporosis epidemiology update. Curr Rheumatol Rep 10:92–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clark P, Cons-Molina F, Deleze M, Ragi S, Haddock L, Zanchetta JR et al (2009) The prevalence of radiographic vertebral fractures in Latin American countries: the Latin American Vertebral Osteoporosis Study (LAVOS). Osteoporos Int 20:275–282. doi: 10.1007/s00198-008-0657-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angeli A, Guglielmi G, Dovio A, Capelli G, de Feo D, Giannini S et al (2006) High prevalence of asymptomatic vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women receiving chronic glucocorticoid therapy: a cross-sectional outpatient study. Bone 39:253–259. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2006.02.005 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bliuc D, Nguyen ND, Mich VE, Nguyen TV, Eisman JÁ, Center JR (2009) Mortality risk associated with low-trauma osteoporotic fracture and subsequent fracture in men and women. JAMA 301:513–521. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.50 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ismail AA, Cockerill W, Cooper C, Finn JD, Abendronth K, Parisi G et al (2001) Prevalent vertebral deformity predicts incident hip though not distal forearm fracture: results from the European prospective osteoporosis study. Osteoporos Int 12:85–90. doi: 10.1007/s001980170138 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fechtenbaum J, Cropet C, Kolta S, Horlait S, Orcel P, Roux C, et al. The severity of vertebral fractures and health-related quality of life in osteoporotic postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 16:2175–2179. doi: 10.1007/s00198-005-2023-0
  9. 9.
    Oleksik AM, Ewing S, Shen W, van Schoor NM, Lips P (2009) Impact of incident vertebral fractures on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in postmenopausal women with prevalent vertebral fractures. Osteoporos Int 16:861–870. doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1774-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rostom S, Allali F, Bahiri R, Abouqal R, Hajjaj-Hassoumi N (2011) Pyschometric properties evaluation of the quality of life Questionnaire of the European foundation for Osteoporosis in Arabic population. Rheumatol Int. [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1007/s00296.011-1910-2
  11. 11.
    Lips P, Cooper C, Agnusdei D, Caulin F, Egger P, Johnell O, Kanis A et al (1999) Quality of life in patients with vertebral fractures: validation of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). Working party for quality of life of the European foundation for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 10:150–160. doi: 10.1007/s001980050210 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koçyigit H, Gulseren S, Erol A, Hizli N, Memis A (2003) The reliability and validity of the Turkish version of quality of life questionnaire of the European Foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). Clin Rheumatol 22:18–23. doi: 10.1007/s10067-002-0653-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Osteoporosis Quality of Life Study Group (1997) Measuring quality of life in women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 7:478–487. doi: 10.1007/pl00004151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Randell AG, Bhalerao N, Nguven TV, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA, Silverman SL (1998) Quality of life in osteoporosis: reliability, consistency, and validity of the osteoporosis assessment questionnaire. J Rheumatol 25:1171–1179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lips P, Cooper C, Agnusdei D, Caulin F, Egger P, Jhonell O et al (1997) Quality of life as outcome in the treatment of osteoporosis: development of a questionnaire for quality of life by the European foundation for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 7:36–38. doi: 10.1007/bf01623457 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marquis P, Cialdella P, De la Loge C (2001) Development and validation of a specific quality of life module in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: the QUALIOST. Quality of life Research 10:555–66. doi: 10.1023/a:1013041206433 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    van Schoor NM, Knol DL, Glas CA, Ostelo RW, Leplège A, Cooper C et al (2006) Development of the Qualeffo-31, an osteoporosis-specific quality of life questionnaire. Osteoporos Int 17:543–551. doi: 10.1007/s00198-005-0024-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Borchers M, Cieza A, Sigl T, Kollerits B, Kostanjsek N, Stucki G (2005) Content comparison of osteoporosis-targeted health status measures in relation to the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF). Clin Rheumatol 24:139–44. doi: 10.1007/s10067-004-0991-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lips P, van Schoor NM (2005) Quality of life in patients with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 16:447–455. doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1762-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fleck MPA, Louzada S, Xavier M, Chachamovich E, Vieira G, Santos L et al (1999) Aplicação da versão em português do instrumento de qualidade de vida da Organização Mundial da Saúde (WHOQOL-100). Rev Saúde Pública 33:198–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    WHO Scientific Group of Research on the menopause in the 1990s (1996) Report of a WHO Scientific Group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 866:1–107Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McCloskey EV, Spector TD, Eyres KS et al (1993) The assessment of vertebral deformity: a method for use in population studies and clinical trials. Osteoporos Int 3:138–147. doi: 10.1007/bf01623275 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ware JE Jr, Keller SD, Hatoum HT, Kong SX (1999) The SF-36 arthritis-specific health index (ASHI): I Development and cross-validation of scoring algorithms. Med Care 37:MS40–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pérez ER, Clark P, Wacher NH, Cardiel MH, García MDPD (2008) Cultural adaptation and validation of the quality of life questionnaire of the European foundation for osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) in a Mexican population. Clin Rheumatol 27:151–161. doi: 10.1007/s10067-007-0661-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Landis RJ, Cook GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Byometrics 33:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schmidt FL, Hunter JE, Urry VW (1976) Statistical power in criterion-related validity studies. J Appl Psychol 61:473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Clinical Rheumatology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Néville de Oliveira Ferreira
    • 1
  • Michael Arthuso
    • 2
  • Raimunda Beserra da Silva
    • 3
  • Aarão Mendes Pinto-Neto
    • 4
  • Lúcia Costa-Paiva
    • 4
  1. 1.Women’s Integrated Healthcare Center (CAISM)Universidade Estadual de Campinas (Unicamp)São PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Unicamp School of MedicineSão PauloBrazil
  3. 3.Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)ParanáBrazil
  4. 4.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUnicamp, School of MedicineCampinasBrazil

Personalised recommendations