The Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Dutch Version of the Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (DSWAL-QOL)

Abstract

The aim of this work was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (DSWAL-QOL). A cross-sectional survey of 295 dysphagic patients and 124 healthy controls was studied to evaluate the validity and reliability of the DSWAL-QOL, and 50 patients were recruited for the test–retest reliability. Construct validity was validated through principal component analysis and a correlation study between the DSWAL-QOL and the SF-36. The psychometric properties of the DSWAL-QOL were found to be largely similar to those of the original SWAL-QOL, except the Sleep scale; the composite Symptoms score reaffirms its validity in this study. The DSWAL-QOL was able to differentiate between dysphagic and nondysphagic patients and is sensitive to disease severity as measured by known-groups validity, based on different food and liquid textures. The DSWAL-QOL is a clinically valid and reliable tool for assessing the quality of life in Dutch-speaking dysphagic patients, regardless of the cause or severity of the dysphagia.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Brunier GM, Graydon J. The influence of physical activity on fatigue in patients with ESRD on hemodialysis. ANNA J. 1993;20(4):457–61. discussion 62, 521.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Delate T, Coons SJ. The discriminative ability of the 12-item short form health survey (SF-12) in a sample of persons infected with HIV. Clin Ther. 2000;22(9):1112–20.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Marks GB, Dunn SM, Woolcock AJ. An evaluation of an asthma quality of life questionnaire as a measure of change in adults with asthma. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(10):1103–11.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Wang B, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB. Fatigue in lupus is not correlated with disease activity. J Rheumatol. 1998;25(5):892–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Ward MM. Clinical measures in rheumatoid arthritis: which are most useful in assessing patients? J Rheumatol. 1994;21(1):17–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Batalden PB, Nelson EC, Roberts JS. Linking outcomes measurement to continual improvement: the serial “V” way of thinking about improving clinical care. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1994;20(4):167–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, Pugsley SO, Chambers LW. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax. 1987;42(10):773–8.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Guyatt G, Mitchell A, Irvine EJ, Singer J, Williams N, Goodacre R, et al. A new measure of health status for clinical trials in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 1989;96(3):804–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    The DCCT Research Group. Reliability and validity of a diabetes quality-of-life measure for the diabetes control and complications trial (DCCT). The DCCT Research Group. Diabetes Care. 1988;11(9):725–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Drossman DA, Li Z, Leserman J, Patrick DL. Ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease health status scales for research and clinical practice. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1992;15(2):104–12.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Laupacis A, Muirhead N, Keown P, Wong C. A disease-specific questionnaire for assessing quality of life in patients on hemodialysis. Nephron. 1992;60(3):302–6.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Laupacis A, Pus N, Muirhead N, Wong C, Ferguson B, Keown P. Disease-specific questionnaire for patients with a renal transplant. Nephron. 1993;64(2):226–31.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:79.

  15. 15.

    McHorney CA, Bricker DE, Kramer AE, Rosenbek JC, Robbins J, Chignell KA, et al. The SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: I. Conceptual foundation and item development. Dysphagia. 2000;15(3):115–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    McHorney CA, Bricker DE, Robbins J, Kramer AE, Rosenbek JC, Chignell KA. The SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: II. Item reduction and preliminary scaling. Dysphagia. 2000;15(3):122–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(8 Pt 2):743–50.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Manning WG, Newhouse JP, Ware JE. Rand Corporation. The status of health in demand estimation: beyond excellent, good, fair, and poor. Santa Monica: Rand; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    McHorney CA, Robbins J, Lomax K, Rosenbek JC, Chignell K, Kramer AE, et al. The SWAL-QOL and SWAL-CARE outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: III. Documentation of reliability and validity. Dysphagia. 2002;17(2):97–114.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Wainer H, Braun HI. Educational testing service. Test validity. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Bogaardt HC, Speyer R, Baijens LW, Fokkens WJ. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Dutch version of SWAL-QoL. Dysphagia. 2009;24(1):66–70.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Hunt SM, Alonso J, Bucquet D, Niero M, Wiklund I, McKenna S. Cross-cultural adaptation of health measures. European group for health management and quality of life assessment. Health Policy. 1991;19(1):33–44.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Razavi D, Gandek B. Testing Dutch and French translations of the SF-36 Health Survey among Belgian angina patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):975–81.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(8):622–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Wilson IB, Cleary PD. Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. JAMA. 1995;273(1):59–65.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Child D. The essentials of factor analysis. 3rd ed. New York: Continuum; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Dunteman GH. Principal Components Analysis (Quantitative applications in the social sciences). Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4(4):293–307.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Everitt B, Palmer CR. Encyclopaedic companion to medical statistics. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314(7080):572.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlations coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Hattie J, Cooksey RW. Procedures for assessing the validities of tests using the “known-groups” method. Appl Psychol Meas. 1984;8.

  38. 38.

    Field AP. Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll), 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Ekberg O, Hamdy S, Woisard V, Wuttge-Hannig A, Ortega P. Social and psychological burden of dysphagia: its impact on diagnosis and treatment. Dysphagia. 2002;17(2):139–46.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Martino R, Beaton D, Diamant NE. Perceptions of psychological issues related to dysphagia differ in acute and chronic patients. Dysphagia. 2010;25(1):26–34.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Finizia C, Rudberg I, Bergqvist H, Ryden A. A cross-sectional validation study of the Swedish version of SWAL-QOL. Dysphagia. 2012. doi:10.1007/s00455-011-9369-6.

  42. 42.

    Chevalier H, Los F, Boichut D, Bianchi M, Nutt DJ, Hajak G, et al. Evaluation of severe insomnia in the general population: results of a European multinational survey. J Psychopharmacol. 1999;13(4 Suppl 1):S21–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Somers A, Robays H, Audenaert K, Van Maele G, Bogaert M, Petrovic M. The use of hypnosedative drugs in a university hospital: has anything changed in 10 years? Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(7):723–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Warie H, Petrovic M, Somers A, Mariman A, Robays H, Pevernagie D. The use of hypnosedative drugs in a university hospital setting. Acta Clin Belg. 2003;58(4):225–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Lam PM, Lai CK. The validation of the Chinese version of the swallow quality-of-life questionnaire (SWAL-QOL) using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Dysphagia. 2011;26(2):117–24.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Vanderwegen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vanderwegen, J., Van Nuffelen, G. & De Bodt, M. The Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Dutch Version of the Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (DSWAL-QOL). Dysphagia 28, 11–23 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-012-9408-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Dysphagia
  • Quality of life
  • Psychometrics
  • Outcome measurements
  • Deglutition
  • Deglutition disorders