Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability and validity of a Turkish version of the Global Pelvic Floor Bother Questionnaire

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

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to translate the Global Pelvic Floor Bother Questionnaire (GPFBQ) into Turkish and to assess its validity and reliability.

Methods

The Turkish adaptation of the GPFBQ was created by following the stages of the intercultural adaptation process. A test–retest interval of 1 week was used to assess the reliability, which was examined by the intraclass correlation coefficient. The validity of the GPFBQ was assessed and compared with the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 (PFIQ-7) using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. For construct validity, confirmatory factor analysis was performed.

Results

A total of 131 women, whose mean age was 46.83 years, were included in the study. The test–retest reliability of the GPFBQ was excellent (0.998, p < 0.0001). The GPFBQ correlated significantly with the PFDI-20 (r = 0.860, p = 0.00) and PFIQ-7 (r = 0.802, p = 0.00). Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to determine construct validity, and it was found that it had four dimensions.

Conclusions

The Turkish version of the GPFBQ is a valid and reliable tool for assessing the symptoms of bother and severity in Turkish-speaking women with pelvic floor dysfunction.

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. Peterson TV, Karp DR, Aguilar VC, Davila GW (2010) Validation of a global pelvic floor symptom bother questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 21(9):1129–1135. doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1148-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bushnell DM, Martin ML, Summers KH, Svihra J, Lionis C, Patrick DL (2005) Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: cross-cultural performance of 15 language versions of the I-QOL. Qual Life Res 14(8):1901–1913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bazi T, Kabakian-Khasholian T, Ezzeddine D, Ayoub H (2013) Validation of an Arabic version of the global pelvic floor bother questionnaire. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet 121(2):166–169. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Deparis J, Bonniaud V, Desseauve D, Guilhot J, Masanovic M, de Tayrac R, Fauconnier A, Fritel X (2015) Cultural adaptation of the female pelvic floor questionnaire (FPFQ) into French. Neurourol Urodyn. doi:10.1002/nau.22932

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaya S, Akbayrak T, Çelenay ŞT, Dolgun A, Ekici G, Beksaç S (2015) Reliability and validity of the Turkish King’s Health Questionnaire in women with urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 26(12):1853–1859

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lipschuetz M, Cohen SM, Liebergall-Wischnitzer M, Zbedat K, Hochner-Celnikier D, Lavy Y, Yagel S (2015) Degree of bother from pelvic floor dysfunction in women one year after first delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 191:90–94. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.05.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25(24):3186–3191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Toprak Celenay S, Akbayrak T, Kaya S, Ekici G, Beksac S (2012) Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20. Int Urogynecol J 23(8):1123–1127. doi:10.1007/s00192-012-1729-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kaplan PB, Sut N, Sut HK (2012) Validation, cultural adaptation and responsiveness of two pelvic-floor-specific quality-of-life questionnaires, PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7, in a Turkish population. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 162(2):229–233. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.03.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Walter S, Eliasziw M, Donner A (1998) Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med 17(1):101–110

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sanchez-Sanchez B, Torres-Lacomba M, Yuste-Sanchez MJ, Navarro-Brazalez B, Pacheco-da-Costa S, Gutierrez-Ortega C, Zapico-Goni A (2013) Cultural adaptation and validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire short form (PFIQ-7) Spanish versions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 170(1):281–285. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.07.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wiesinger GF, Nuhr M, Quittan M, Ebenbichler G, Wolfl G, Fialka-Moser V (1999) Cross-cultural adaptation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire for German-speaking patients with low back pain. Spine 24(11):1099–1103

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Barber MD (2007) Questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(4):461–465. doi:10.1007/s00192-006-0252-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karasar N (2014) Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  15. Şenocak M (2009) Klinik biyoistatistik. Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  16. Aksayan S, Gözüm S (2002) Kültürler arası ölçek uyarlaması için rehber I: Ölçek uyarlama aşamaları ve dil uyarlaması. Hemşirelik Araştırma Derg 4(1):9–14

    Google Scholar 

  17. DeVon HA, Block ME, Moyle-Wright P, Ernst DM, Hayden SJ, Lazzara DJ, Savoy SM, Kostas-Polston E (2007) A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. J Nurs Scholarsh 39(2):155–164. doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00161.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Health Science, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey

    Hanife Doğan

  2. School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Abant Izzet Baysal University, 14280, Bolu, Turkey

    Nuriye Özengin & Yeşim Bakar

  3. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey

    Bülent Duran

Authors
  1. Hanife Doğan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nuriye Özengin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yeşim Bakar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bülent Duran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nuriye Özengin.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Doğan, H., Özengin, N., Bakar, Y. et al. Reliability and validity of a Turkish version of the Global Pelvic Floor Bother Questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 27, 1577–1581 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3014-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3014-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation