Abstract
Introduction and hypothesis
Pelvic floor dysfunction may be treated and prevented during pregnancy and postpartum, as it decreases women’s quality of life. The aim of the present study was to translate and validate the Brazilian Portuguese questionnaire for the assessment of pelvic floor disorders and their risk factors during pregnancy and postpartum.
Methods
This is a cross-sectional study. Two translators fluent in German translated the German version of the questionnaire into English. The back translation was performed by two other translators. The final version was tested on Brazilian pregnant/puerperal women. The participants answered the questionnaire twice, with an interval of 7–10 days between sessions. They also completed the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). To evaluate the test–retest reliability, we used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Cronbach's alpha coefficient, to test the internal consistency, and Pearson's linear correlation to assess construct validity.
Results
Sixty-six women were included (77% pregnant; 23% puerperal women), with a mean age of 26.5 ± 5.8 years and a body mass index of 26.4 ± 5.7 kg/cm2. There were no missing ceiling or floor effects. The construct validity presented a moderate correlation with the role physical domain of the SF-36 (r = −0.48), the ICC test–retest showed good reliability of 0.72, and the internal consistency was 0.71.
Conclusions
These results provide evidence that the questionnaire for the assessment of pelvic floor disorders and their risk factors during pregnancy and postpartum is a valid and reliable instrument when utilized in Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Schreiner L, Crivelatti I, de Oliveira JM, et al. Systematic review of pelvic floor interventions during pregnancy. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2018;143:10–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12513.
Kahyaoglu Sut H, Balkanli Kaplan P. Effect of pelvic floor muscle exercise on pelvic floor muscle activity and voiding functions during pregnancy and the postpartum period: effect of pregnancy and delivery on pelvic floor. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35:417–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22728.
Palmezoni VP, Santos MD, Pereira JM, et al. Pelvic floor muscle strength in primigravidae and non-pregnant nulliparous women: a comparative study. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:131–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3088-3.
Iglesia C. Pelvic floor changes: consequences of pregnancy and delivery. BJOG. 2016;123:830. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13538.
Hill A-M, McPhail SM, Wilson JM, Berlach RG. Pregnant women’s awareness, knowledge and beliefs about pelvic floor muscles: a cross-sectional survey. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:1557–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3309-4.
Castro-Pardiñas MA, Torres-Lacomba M, Navarro-Brazález B. Función muscular del suelo pélvico en mujeres sanas, puérperas y con disfunciones del suelo pélvico. Actas Urol Esp. 2017;41:249–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2016.11.007.
Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, Myers ER. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278–83. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c2ce96.
Leon-Larios F, Corrales-Gutierrez I, Casado-Mejía R, Suarez-Serrano C. Influence of a pelvic floor training programme to prevent perineal trauma: a quasi-randomised controlled trial. Midwifery. 2017;50:72–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2017.03.015.
Hallock JL, Handa VL. The epidemiology of pelvic floor disorders and childbirth. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2016;43:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2015.10.008.
Colla C, Paiva LL, Ferla L, et al. Pelvic floor dysfunction in the immediate puerperium, and 1 and 3 months after vaginal or cesarean delivery. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2018;143:94–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12561.
Bø K, Hilde G, Stær-Jensen J, et al. Postpartum pelvic floor muscle training and pelvic organ prolapse—a randomized trial of primiparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212:38.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.049.
Wallwiener CW, Wallwiener L-M, Seeger H, et al. Sexual function, contraception, relationship, and lifestyle in female medical students. J Womens Health. 2017;26:169–77. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2015.5731.
Schraffordt Koops SE, Vervest HAM, Oostvogel HJM. Anorectal symptoms after various modes of vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14:244–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-003-1040-9.
Solans-Domènech M, Sánchez E, Espuña-Pons M. Urinary and anal incontinence during pregnancy and postpartum: incidence, severity, and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:618–28. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d04dff.
Metz M, Junginger B, Henrich W, Baeßler K. Development and validation of a questionnaire for the assessment of pelvic floor disorders and their risk factors during pregnancy and post partum. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2017;77:358–65. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102693.
Mokkink L, Terwee C, Patrick D, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006.
Baessler K, O’Neill SM, Maher CF, Battistutta D. A validated self-administered female pelvic floor questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:163–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0997-4.
Palmieri S, Cola A, Ceccherelli A, et al. Italian validation of the German pelvic floor questionnaire for pregnant and postpartum women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;248:133–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.03.032.
Koyuncu K, Sakin O, Akalın EE, et al. Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation and reliability of assessment of pelvic floor disorders and their risk factors during pregnancy and postpartum questionnaire in Turkish population. Ginekol Pol. 2020;91:12.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–91. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
Campolina AG, Bortoluzzo AB, Ferraz MB, Ciconelli RM. Validação da versão brasileira do questionário genérico de qualidade de vida short-form 6 dimensions (SF-6D Brasil). Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2011;16:3103–10. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232011000800010.
De Vet HCW, Mokkink LB, Mosmuller DG, Terwee CB. Spearman-Brown prophecy formula and Cronbach’s alpha: different faces of reliability and opportunities for new applications. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;85:45–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.013.
Fleiss J, Levin B, Paik M. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Hoboken: Wiley; 2003.
Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
Arouca M, Duarte T, Lott D, et al. Validation and cultural translation for Brazilian Portuguese version of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20). Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27:1097–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2938-8.
Peterson TV, Pinto RA, Davila GW, et al. Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the pelvic floor bother questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30:81–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3627-1.
Campolina AG, Ciconelli RM. O SF-36 e o desenvolvimento de novas medidas de avaliação de qualidade de vida. Acta Reumatol Port. 2008;33:127–33.
Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, et al. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0176-2.
Zuchelo LTS, Bezerra IMP, Da Silva ATM, et al. Questionnaires to evaluate pelvic floor dysfunction in the postpartum period: a systematic review. Int J Womens Health. 2018;10:409–24. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S164266.
Funding
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001 and grant #2018/26718–9, São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
R.C.M. da Silva Vieira: project development, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing, and final approval of the version to be published; J.B. da Silva: data collection, drafting and revising the article critically, and final approval of the version to be published; R. de Carvalho Cavalli: drafting and revising the article critically, and final approval of the version to be published; P. Driusso: project development, data analysis, drafting and revising the article critically, and final approval of the version to be published.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the Federal University of São Carlos.
Conflicts of interest
None.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
da Silva Vieira, R.C.M., Silva, J.B.d., de Carvalho Cavalli, R. et al. Validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the questionnaire for the assessment of pelvic floor disorders and their risk factors during pregnancy and postpartum. Int Urogynecol J 33, 3155–3161 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05101-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05101-z