Abstract
Introduction and hypothesis
The aim of this study was to cross-culturally adapt and validate the Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire.
Methods
The Australian pelvic floor questionnaire was translated according to the standard method of back-translation. Women who presented with pelvic floor disorders completed the Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire. Women were subjected to clinical and gynecological assessment including physical examination, cough stress test, pelvic prolapse anatomical assessment using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system, and post-void residual volume. Reliability and divergent validity was performed on 76 patients with significant pelvic floor dysfunction and 23 women without pelvic floor dysfunction. Patients repeated the questionnaire after 4 weeks.
Results
High reliability was observed in all four dimensions (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were above 0.8 for each dimension: bladder 0.846, bowel 0.822, prolapse 0.842, and sexual function 0.823). Test-retest analyses revealed high reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficients were above 0.9). Prolapse symptom score correlated significantly with pelvic organ quantification and bladder score correlated significantly with the results of the cough stress test (convergent validity). Scores distinguished between patients with pelvic floor disorders and controls (high discriminant validity).
Conclusions
The Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument for assessment of quality of life in women with pelvic floor disorders.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bump RC, Norton PA (1998) Epidemiology and natural history of pelvic floor dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 25(4):723–746
Jelovsek JE, Maher C, Barber MD (2007) Pelvic organ prolapse. Lancet 369:1027–1038
Melville JL, Katon W, Delaney K, Newton K (2005) Urinary incontinence in US women: a population-based study. Arch Intern Med 165(5):537–542
Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185(6):1388–1395
Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C (2013) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD004014
Shumaker SA, Wyman JF, Uebersax JS, McClish D, Fantl JA (1994) Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program in Women (CPW) Research Group. Qual Life Res 3:291–306
Uebersax JS, Wyman JF, Shumaker SA, McClish DK, Fantl JA (1995) Short forms to assess life quality and symptom distress for urinary incontinence in women: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program for Women Research Group. Neurourol Urodyn 14:131–139
Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Khullar V, Salvatore S (1997) A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinent women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:1374–1379
Jackson S, Donovan J, Brookes S, Eckford S, Swithinbank L, Abrams P (1996) The Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms questionnaire: development and psychometric testing. Br J Urol 77:805–812
Baessler K, O’Neill SM, Maher CF, Battistutta D (2008) An interviewer-administered validated female pelvic floor questionnaire for community-based research. Menopause 15(5):973–977
Baessler K, O’Neill SM, Maher CF, Battistutta D (2010) A validated self-administered female pelvic floor questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 21(2):163–172
Haylen BT, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Cosson M, Davila GW et al (2011) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes) & grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Int Urogynecol J 22:3–15
Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B et al (2010) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 21:5–26
Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structures of tests. Psychometrika 3:297–334
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310
Chan SS, Cheung RY, Yiu AK, Li JC, Lai BP, Choy KW, Chung TK (2011) Chinese validation of Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 22(10):1305–1312
Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, Jakobsson U (2011) Validation of the Swedish short forms of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(5):483–487
Sushil S, Verma N (2010) Questionnaire validation made easy. Eur J Sci Res 46(2):172–178
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire
Appendix: Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Argirović, A., Tulić, C., Kadija, S. et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Serbian version of the Australian pelvic floor questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 26, 131–138 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2495-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2495-6