Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 1093–1098 | Cite as

Further evidence of reliability and validity of the Huntington’s disease quality of life battery for carers: Italian and French translations

  • Aimee AubeeluckEmail author
  • Julie Dorey
  • Ferdinando Squitieri
  • Emilie Clay
  • Edward J. N. Stupple
  • Annunziata De Nicola
  • Heather Buchanan
  • Tiziana Martino
  • Mondher Toumi
Brief Communication

Abstract

Background

Existing research suggests that family caregivers of persons with Huntington’s disease (HD) face a distinct series of problems, linked to the complex nature of the disease. Aubeeluck and Buchanan (Clin Genet, 71(5):434–445, 2007) developed and validated a disease-specific measure used to explore caregivers quality of life and assess the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. This current study builds on this research through the validation of French and Italian translations of the Huntington’s disease quality of life battery for carers (HDQoL-C).

Method

A total of 301 family carers completed the HDQoL-C. Participants were recruited through the “Euro-HDB” study which is measuring the burden in HD across Europe and the USA.

Results

Factor analysis demonstrated good internal consistency, reliability and congruent validity. Carers who cared for patients with less clinically severe symptoms reported significantly better QoL than carers of patients with more clinically severe symptoms.

Discussion

Findings indicate the HDQoL-C is multi-lingual, multi-cultural and easily applicable in other languages.

Keywords

Family caregiving Huntington’s disease Questionnaire Quality of life 

Abbreviations

HD

Huntington’s disease

QoL

Quality of life

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks are given to the family caregivers who gave up their limited time to take part in this research as well as the patient association “ASSOCIATION HUNTINGTON FRANCE.” We would like to thank both reviewers for their constructive feedback and expertise, in particular (XXXX) for their efforts in reconstructing elements of the validation section.

Conflicts of interest

The University of Lyon received an educational grant for the survey from Neurosearch.

References

  1. 1.
    Aubeeluck, A., & Buchanan, H. (2007). The Huntington’s disease quality of life battery for carers: reliability and validity. Clinical Genetics, 71(5), 434–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bates, G., Harper, P., & Jones, L. (2002). Huntington’s disease (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Quarrell, O. (2008). Huntington’s disease: The facts (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Imarisio, S., Carmichael, J., Korolchuk, V., Chen, C.-W., Saiki, S., Rose, C., et al. (2008). Huntington’s disease: From pathology and genetics to potential therapies. Journal of Biochemistry, 412, 191–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Veenhuizen, R. B., & Tibben, A. (2009). Coordinated multidisciplinary care for Huntington’s disease. A outpatient department. Brain Research Bulletin, 80, 192–195.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kessler, S. (1993). Forgotten person in the Huntington disease family. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 48, 145–150.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams, J. K., Schutte, D. L., Holkup, P. A., Evers, C., & Muilenburg, A. (2000). Psychosocial impact of predictive testing for Huntington’s disease on support persons. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96, 353–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hartelius, L., Jonsson, M., Rickeberg, A., & Laakso, K. (2010). Communications and Huntington’s disease: Qualitative interviews and focus groups with persons with Huntington’s disease, family members and carers. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 45(3), 381–393.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ready, R. E., Mathews, M., Leserman, A., & Paulsen, J. S. (2008). Patient and caregiver quality of life in Huntington’s disease. Movement Disorders, 23(5), 721–726.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hans, M. B., & Koeppen, A. H. (1980). Huntington’s Chorea: Its impact on the spouse. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders, 168, 209–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Semple, O. D. (1995). The experiences of family members of persons with Huntington’s disease. Perspectives, 19(4), 4–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aubeeluck, A., & Buchanan, H. (2006). Capturing the Huntington’s disease spousal carer experience: A preliminary investigation using the ‘photovoice’ method. Dementia: The international Journal of Social Research and Practice, 5(1), 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayden, M. R., Ehrlich, R., Parker, H., & Ferera, S. J. (1980). Social perspectives in Huntington’s chorea. South African Medical Journal, 58, 201–203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tyler, A., Harper, P. S., Davies, K., & Newcome, R. G. (1983). Family break-down and stress in Huntington’s chorea. Journal of Biosocial Science, 15, 127–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korer, J., & Fitzsimmons, J. S. (1985). The effect of Huntington’s chorea on family life. British Journal of Social Work, 15, 581–597.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shakespeare, J., & Anderson, J. (1993). Huntington’s disease—falling through the net. Heath Trends (England), 25(1), 19–23.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Williams, J. K., Skirton, H., Paulsen, J. S., Tripp-Reimer, T., Jarmon, L., McGonigal Kenny, M., & Birrer, E, et al. (2009). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(4), 789–798.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cummins, R. A. (1997). The comprehensive quality of life scale (CoMQoL-A5) manual. Toorak: Deakin University.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aubeeluck, A. (2005). The development and validation of a scale to measure the impact of Huntington’s disease on the quality of life of Spousal carers. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Derby.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Euro-HDB (2009). The first large, comprehensive European Study on the burden of Huntington’s disease. 09 Nov 21.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for Binaryand Likert-Type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human ResourcesResearch and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Skirton, H., Williams, J., Jackson Barnette, J., & Paulsen, J. S. (2010). Huntington’s disease: Families’ experiences of healthcare services. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(3), 500–519.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Skirton, H., & Glendinning, N. (2007). Using research to develop care for patients with Huntington’s disease. British Journal of Nursing, 6(2), 83–90.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    US Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration (2009, December). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., et al. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translating adaptation. Value in Health, 2, 94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Adam, P., & Herzlich, C. (2007). Sociologie de la maladie et de la médecine. Armand Colin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aimee Aubeeluck
    • 1
    Email author
  • Julie Dorey
    • 2
  • Ferdinando Squitieri
    • 3
  • Emilie Clay
    • 2
  • Edward J. N. Stupple
    • 4
  • Annunziata De Nicola
    • 3
  • Heather Buchanan
    • 3
    • 5
  • Tiziana Martino
    • 3
  • Mondher Toumi
    • 6
  1. 1.Division of Nursing, School of Nursing, Midwifery and PhysiotherapyUniversity of NottinghamDerbyUK
  2. 2.Creativ-CeuticalParisFrance
  3. 3.Centre for Neurogenetics and Rare DiseasesIRCCS NeuromedPozzilliItaly
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversity of DerbyDerbyUK
  5. 5.Department of Health Psychology, Institute of Work, Health and OrganisationUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK
  6. 6.University Claude Bernard Lyon IVilleurbanneFrance

Personalised recommendations