International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 107–114 | Cite as

Dutch translation and validation of the pelvic organ prolapse/incontinence sexual questionnaire-IUGA revised (PISQ-IR)

  • Heleen van DongenEmail author
  • Huub van der Vaart
  • Kirsten B. Kluivers
  • Henk Elzevier
  • Jan Paul Roovers
  • Alfredo L. Milani
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

Condition-specific sexual questionnaires are important patient-reported outcome measures. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-International Urogynecology Association Revised (PISQ-IR) into Dutch.


The translated PISQ-IR was linguistically validated, followed by psychometrical validation among women presenting with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction in urogynecology clinics. For analysis of the criterion validity, the Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) were used. Descriptive statistics, floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and Pearson's and Spearman’s correlations were calculated for all PISQ-IR subscales.


The PISQ-IR was completed by 220 women, of whom 61 (27.7%) considered themselves not sexually active (NSA) and 159 (72.3%) sexually active (SA). The mean age of participating women was 57 years; 49.5% reported symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), 66.8% urinary incontinence and 2.3% anal incontinence. The PISQ-IR subscales were analyzed separately for SA and NSA women with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient ranging from 0.61 to 0.87. Moderate to high correlations were observed between PISQ-IR subscales and corresponding FSFI subscales and a moderate correlation between urinary distress and the condition impact (CI) subscale among NSA subjects.


The Dutch PISQ-IR demonstrated a good internal consistency and criterion validity compared with the FSFI, but criterion validity compared with the PFDI-20 was poor except for urinary distress in NSA women and needs further attention.


Pelvic floor dysfunction Pelvic organ prolapse Urinary and/or anal incontinence Sexual function questionnaire Validation 



We thank Ms. A. van der Ster, research coordinator, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands, for distributing and collecting all questionnaires and entering the data into the database.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest


Supplementary material

192_2018_3718_MOESM1_ESM.docx (47 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 47 kb)
192_2018_3718_MOESM2_ESM.docx (80 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 80 kb)


  1. 1.
    Haylen BT, Maher CF, Barber MD, Camargo S, Dandolu V, Digesu A, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(2):137–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rogers RG, Villarreal A, Kammerer-Doak D, Qualls C. Sexual function in women with and without urinary incontinence and/or pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001;12(6):362–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barber MD, Visco AG, Wyman JF, Fantl JA, Bump RC. Continence program for women research. Sexual function in women with urinary incontinence and plevic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99(2):281–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rogers RG, Kammerer-Doak D, Villarreal A, Coates K, Qualls C. A new instrument to measure sexual function in women with urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolaps. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184(4):552–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The female sexual function index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26(2):191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ter Kuile MM, Brauer M, Laan E. The female sexual function index (FSFI) and the female sexual distress scale (FSDS): psychometric proporties within a Dutch population. J Sex Marital Ther. 2006;32(4):289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ‘t Hoen LA, Utomo E, Steensma AB, Blok BF, Korfage IJ. The pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12): validation of the Dutch version. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(9):1293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rogers RG, Rockwood TH, Constantine ML, Thakar R, Kammerer-Doak DN, Pauls RN, et al. A new measure of sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFD); the pelvic organ prolapse/incontinence sexual questionnaire, IUGA-revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(7):1091–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pett MA, Lackey NR. Making sense of factor analysis: the use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Chapter 2 Designing and testing the instrument; determining the number of subjects, page 47. Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage Pub.; 2003.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Utomo E, Blok BF, Steensma AB, Korfage IJ. Validation of the pelvic floor distress inventory (PFDI-20) and pelvic floor impact questionnaire (PFIQ-7) in a Dutch population. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:531–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rockwood TH, Constantine ML, Adegoke O, Rogers RG, McDermott E, Davila GW, et al. The PISQ-IR: considerations in scale scoring and development. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(7):1105–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mestre M, Lleberia J, Pubill J, Espuna-Pons M. Spanish version of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire IUGA-revised (PISQ-IR): transcultural validation. Int Urogynecol J. 2017.
  13. 13.
    Farkas B, Tiringer I, Farkas N, Kenryeres B, Nemeth Z. Hungarian language validation of the pelvic organ prolapse/incontinence sexual questionnaire, IUGA-revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27:1831–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grzybowska ME, Piaskowska-Cala J, Wydra DG. Polish translation and validation of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire, IUGA-revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2017.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Al-Badr A, Al-Juraifani R, Al-Sheikh G, Al-Mandeel H, Al-Dakhyel L, Al-Shahrani N. Validation of the international urgynecology association’s pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire in Arabic. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:437–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laumann EO, Paik A, Rosen RC. Sexual dysfunction in the United States: prevalence and predictors. JAMA. 1999;281(6):537–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lowenstein L, Gamble T, Sanses TV, van Raalte H, Carberry C, Jakus S, et al. Changes in sexual function after treatment for prolapse are related to the improvement in body image perception. J Sex Med. 2010;7(2pte2):1023–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lindau S, Schumm LP, Laumann E, Levinson W, O’Muircheartaigh C, Waite L. A study of sexuality and health among older adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):762–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Addis IB, van den Eeden SK, Wassel-Fyr CL, Vittinghoff E, Brown JS, Thom DH. Sexual activity and function middle-aged and older women. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(4):755–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang H, Lau H-H, Hung M-J, Huang W-C, Zheng Y-W, Su T-H. Validation of a mandarin Chinese version of the pelvic organ prolaps/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire IUGA-revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(11):1695–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Trotnovsky G, Nagele E, Ulrich D, Aigmüller T, Dörfler D, Geiss I, et al. German translation and validation of the pelvic organ Prolaps/incontinence sexual questionnaire-IUGA revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(8):1235–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heleen van Dongen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Huub van der Vaart
    • 2
  • Kirsten B. Kluivers
    • 3
  • Henk Elzevier
    • 4
  • Jan Paul Roovers
    • 5
  • Alfredo L. Milani
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyGroene Hart HospitalGoudaThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of GynecologyUniversity Medical Center UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of GynecologyRadboud University Medical CenterNijmegenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Urology and Department of Medical Decision MakingLeiden University Medical CenterLeidenThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of Gynecology, Academic Medical CenterUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyReinier de Graaf HospitalDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations