Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Responsiveness of the electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor (ePAQ-PF)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the responsiveness of the electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor (ePAQ-PF) in women undergoing surgery for pelvic floor disorders. Fifty-four women undergoing tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) and 47 women undergoing prolapse surgery completed ePAQ-PF at baseline and 3 months postoperatively. Responsiveness was calculated using effect sizes, standardized response means, responsiveness statistic, and minimally important difference. In the TVT group, the largest effect sizes were seen in the urinary domains for stress urinary incontinence (2.4), quality of life (2.2), and overactive bladder (0.9). In the prolapse group, the largest effect sizes were seen in the vaginal domains for prolapse (2.1) and quality of life (1.0). ePAQ-PF is responsive to change in women undergoing TVT or prolapse surgery in the salient and expected domains of stress incontinence and prolapse and quality of life and can be recommended for outcome measurement in this context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eva UF, Gun W, Preben K (2003) Prevalence of urinary and fecal incontinence and symptoms of genital prolapse in women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 82:280–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pauls RN, Silva WA, Rooney CM, Siddighi S, Kleeman SD, Dryfhout V, Karram MM (2007) Sexual function after vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obset Gynecol 197(622):e1–e7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rogers RG, Kammerer-Doak D, Darrow A, Murray K, Qualls C, Olsen A, Barber M (2006) Does sexual function change after surgery for stress urinary incontinence and/or pelvic organ prolapse? A multicenter prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:e1–e4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ghoniem G, Stanford E, Kenton K, Achtari C, Goldberg R, Mascarenhas T, Parekh M, Tamussino K, Tosson S, Lose G, Petri E (2008) Evaluation and outcome measures in the treatment of female urinary stress incontinence: International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) guidelines for research and clinical practice. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:5–33

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Radley SC, Jones GL, Tanguy EA, Stevens VG, Nelson C, Mathers NJ (2006) Computer interviewing in urogynaecology: concept, development and psychometric testing of an electronic pelvic floor assessment questionnaire in primary and secondary care. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 113:231–238

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jones GL, Radley SC, Lumb J, Jha S (2008) Electronic pelvic floor symptoms assessment: tests of data quality of ePAQ-PF. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:1337–1347, Epub ahead of print

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bowling A (2005) Measuring health—a review of quality of life measurement scales, 3rd edn. Open University Press, Milton Keynes

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fayers PM, Machin D (2007) Quality of life—the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  9. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G (1987) Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chron Dis 40:171–178

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. McCracken GR, Henderson NA, Ashe RG (2007) Five year follow-up comparing tension-free vaginal tape and colposuspension. Ulster Med J 76:146–149

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Burbaker L et al (2004) Abdominal sacral colpopexy in 163 women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse and enterocele: evolution of operative techniques. J Reprod Med 37:323–327

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ward KL, Hilton P, UK and Ireland TVT Trial Group (2004) A prospective multicenter randomized trial of tension-free vaginal tape and colposuspension for primary urodynamic stress incontinence: two-year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:324–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ward KL, Hilton P, UK and Ireland TVT Trial Group (2008) Tension-free vaginal tape versus colposuspension for primary urodynamic stress incontinence: 5-year follow up. BJOG 115:226–233

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Walters SJ, Brazier JE (2003) What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR, Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group (2002) Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 77:371–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lydick E, Epstein RS (1993) Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res 2:221–226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, Burnam MA, Patrick DL, Perin EB (1996) Evaluating quality of life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther 18:979–992

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kazis L, Anderson J, Meenan R (1989) Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 27:178–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cohen J (1977) Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jenkinson C (1994) Measuring health and medical outcomes. UCL Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  21. Guyatt GH, Eagle DJ, Sackett B (1993) Measuring quality of life in the frail elderly. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1433–1444

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Colwell H, Mathias SD, Pasta DJ, Henning JM, Steege JF (1998) A health-related quality of life instrument for symptomatic patients with endometriosis: a validation study. Am J Obset Gynecol 179:47–55

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hajiro T, Nishimura K (2002) Minimal clinically significant difference in health status: the thorny path of health status measures? Eur Respir J 19:390–391

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Guyatt GH, Feeny D, Patrick D (1991) Proceedings of the international conference on the measurement of quality of life as an outcome in clinical trials: postscript. Controlled Clin Trials 12:266s–269s

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ulmsten U, Henriksson L, Johnson P, Varhos G (1996) An ambulatory surgical procedure under local anaesthesia for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J pelvic Floor Dysfunct 7:81–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ward K, Hilton P, United Kingdom and Ireland Tension-free Vaginal Tape Trial Group (2002) Prospective multicentre randomised trial of tension-free vaginal tape and colposuspension as primary treatment for stress incontinence. BMJ 325(7355):67, 13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gustilo-Ashby AM, Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD, Barber MD (2007) Bowel symptoms 1 year after surgery for prolapse: further analysis of a randomised trial of rectocele repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:76.e1–e5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hiller L, Bradshaw HD, Radley SC, Radley S (2007) Criterion validity of the BBUSQ-22: a questionnaire assessing bowel and urinary tract symptoms in women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(10):1133–1137, Oct

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE (1994) Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 47:81–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Badia X, Webb SM, Prieto L, Lara N (2004) Acromegaly quality of life questionnaire (AcroQoL). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2:13, 27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the women who completed the ePAQ-PF and we are grateful for their support in enabling the instrument to be used as part of their routine clinical care.

Conflicts of interest

G.L.J., J.L., and A.F. have no conflicts of interests to declare. S.C.R. is a director of EPAQ systems Ltd., a recently formed NHS spinout technology company

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health Services Research Section, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK

    G. L. Jones

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jessop Wing, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust, Sheffield, S10 2SF, UK

    S. C. Radley & A. Farkas

  3. University of Sheffield, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, S10 2R, UK

    J. Lumb

Authors
  1. G. L. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. C. Radley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Lumb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Farkas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. L. Jones.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, G.L., Radley, S.C., Lumb, J. et al. Responsiveness of the electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor (ePAQ-PF). Int Urogynecol J 20, 557–564 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0790-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0790-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation