Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural adaptation and validation of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) in a Mexican population

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Measuring quality of life (QOL) is important, but to date, questionnaires to measure QOL in Mexican patients with osteoporosis (OP) have not been validated. A study was carried out to culturally adapt and validate the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) in a Mexican population. Interviews were performed with 160 women, 80 patients with at least one vertebral fracture, and 80 patients with OP as determined by the World Health Organization criteria. Several cultural modifications were made to the Spanish version of the QUALEFFO. Content validity was assessed by a group of experts, and a pilot study was undertaken. At the same time, the Spanish version of the Short Form 36 (Medical Outcomes Study) was applied. The mean age of patients was 71.9 ± 11.1. The QOL questionnaire showed a test–retest reproducibility (R i = 0.94) and internal consistency (α = 0.92), while social function scored low (α = 0.46). Concurrent validity was significant (r = −0.837, p < 0.001). Significant differences were found between the two groups for pain (p < 0.05), physical function (p < 0.01), social function (p < 0.01), mental function (p < 0.05), and number of fractures (p < 0.001). Discriminatory characteristics between the groups were significant for physical (p < 0.001), social (p < 0.001), and mental (p < 0.02) function. The cultural adaptation of the QUALEFFO was consistent, homogenous, and discriminative. It also showed deterioration in the QOL group of Mexicans with vertebral fractures. The QUALEFFO can be used in a Mexican population to measure the QOL in patients with vertebral fractures after some cultural modifications to take into account local sensibilities.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Randell AG, Bhalerao N, Nguyen TV et al (1998) Quality of life in osteoporosis: reliability, consistency, and validity of the osteoporosis assessment. J Rheumatol 25:1171–1179

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lydick E, Zimmerman SI, Yawn B et al (1997) Development and validation of a discriminative quality of life questionnaire for osteoporosis (the OPTQoL). J Bone Miner Res 12(3):456–463

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Adachi JD et al (1999) Development and validation of the mini-Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ) in osteoporotic women with back pain due to vertebral fractures. Osteoporosis Quality of Life Study Group. Osteoporos Int 10:207–213

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation in health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Borges-Yañez A (1993) Transición demográfica en México. Situación de la población anciana. Bol Mens Epidemiol 8:81–88

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clark P, Delezé M, Cons Molina F et al (2003) The incidence of vertebral fractures in Mexican population. J Bone Miner Res 18:S244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Haczynski J, Jakimiuk A (2001) Vertebral fractures: a hidden problem of osteoporosis. Med Sci Monit 7(5):1108–1117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Adachi JD (1993) Quality of life issues in women with vertebral fractures due to osteoporosis. Arthritis Rheum 56:2469–2475

    Google Scholar 

  9. Oleksik A, Lips P, Dawson A et al (2000) Health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with low BMD with or without prevalent vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 15(7):1384–1392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hall SE, Criddle RA, Comito TL et al (1999) A case control study of quality of life and functional impairment in women with long standing vertebral osteoporotic fracture. Osteoporos Int 9:508–515

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gold DT (1996) The clinical impact of vertebral fractures: quality of life in women with osteoporosis. Bone 18:185S–189S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Black DM et al (1999) Defining incident vertebral deformity: a prospective comparison of several approaches. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. J Bone Miner Res 14(1):90–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Eastell R, Cedel SL, Wahner HW et al (1991) Classification of vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 3(6):207–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zúñiga MA, Carrillo-Jiménez GT, Fos PS et al (1999) Evaluación del estado de salud con la Encuesta SF-36: resultados preliminares. Salud Publica Mex 41:110–118

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Streiner DL, Norman GR (1989) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford (Chapters 2 and 3)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Genant HK, Jergas M (2003) Assessment of prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in osteoporosis research. Osteoporos Int 14(Suppl 3):S43–S55

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L et al (2003) A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 56:730–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mary D, Nettleman MD (1988) Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 9(8):374–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. López de Ullibarri GI, Fernández P (1998) Curvas ROC. Cad Aten Prim 5(4):229–235

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lips P, Cooper C, Agnus D et al (1999) Quality of life in patients with vertebral fractures: validation of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). Osteoporos Int 10:150–160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Murrel P, Todd CJ, Martín A et al (2001) Postal Administration compared with nurse-supported administration of the Qualeffo-41 in a population sample: comparison of results and assessment of psychometric properties. Osteoporos Int 12:672–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Badia X, Díez-Pérez A, Alvarez-Sanz C et al (2001) Measuring quality of life in women with vertebral fractures due to osteoporosis: A comparison of the OQLQ and QUALEFFO. Qual Life Res 10(4):307–317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kocyigit H, Gülseren S, Erol A et al (2003) The reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). Clin Rheumatol 22:18–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ferrater-Mora J (2001) Diccionario de Filosofía. Tomo 1 ed. Ariel, Barcelona, pp 762–766

  25. Cardiel MH, Abello-Banfi M, Ruiz-Mercado R et al (1993) How to measure health status in rheumatoid artritis in non-English speaking patients: validation of a Spanish version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (Spanish HAQ-DI). Clin Exp Rheumatol 11:117–121

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ross PD (1997) Clinical consequences of vertebral fractures. Am J Med 18;103(2A):30S–42S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Oleksik A, Lips P, Dawson A et al (2000) Health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with low BMD with or without prevalent vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 15(7):1384–1392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Melton LJ, Atkinson EJ, Cooper C et al (1999) Vertebral fractures predicts subsequent fractures. Osteoporos Int 10:214–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gold DT (1996) The clinical impact of vertebral fractures: quality of life in women with osteoporosis. Bone 18:185S–189S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the LAVOS work group, Dr. Paul Lips, Dr. Margarita Delezé, Dr. Norma Marin, Dr. Alma R. Estrada, Dr. Martha Altamirano, and Mariana Aguilar for their important support in carrying out this study. This study was supported by a grant from CONACYT no. 162896.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. División de Investigación, Depto. Epidemiología Sociomédica, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación, Av. México Xochimilco 289, Col. Arenal Guadalupe, Delegación Tlalpan, Distrito Federal, C.P. 14889, México, DF, Mexico

    Esperanza Ramírez Pérez & Ma. del Pilar Diez García

  2. Clínica de Osteoporosis, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación, México, DF, Mexico

    Esperanza Ramírez Pérez & Ma. del Pilar Diez García

  3. Unidad de Investigación en Epidemiología Clínica, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Siglo XXI, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Facultad de Medicina, UNAM, México, DF, Mexico

    Patricia Clark & Niels H. Wacher

  4. Depto. de Inmunología y Reumatología, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, México, DF, Mexico

    Mario H. Cardiel

Authors
  1. Esperanza Ramírez Pérez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Niels H. Wacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mario H. Cardiel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ma. del Pilar Diez García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esperanza Ramírez Pérez.

Appendix 1: Spanish version of the QUALEFFO: Cuestionario sobre calidad de vida validado en población Mexicana

Appendix 1: Spanish version of the QUALEFFO: Cuestionario sobre calidad de vida validado en población Mexicana

A. Dolor

Las cinco preguntas de esta sección se refieren a la situación del paciente en la última semana

Table 5
Full size table

B. Estado físico: Actividades de la vida diaria

Las cuatro preguntas siguientes se refieren a la situación actual

Table 6
Full size table

C. Estado físico: tareas domésticas

Las cinco preguntas siguientes se refieren a la situación actual. Si hay otra persona que se ocupe de realizar estas tareas en su casa, conteste como si las tuviese que realizar usted.

Table 7
Full size table

D. Estado físico: movilidad

Las ocho preguntas siguientes también se refieren a la situación actual.

Table 8
Full size table

E. Ocio, actividades sociales

Table 9
Full size table

F. Percepción de la salud general

Table 10
Full size table

G. Estado mental

Las nueve preguntas siguientes se refieren a la situación en la última semana

Table 11
Full size table

Cultural modification of wording

Table 12
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramírez Pérez, E., Clark, P., Wacher, N.H. et al. Cultural adaptation and validation of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO) in a Mexican population. Clin Rheumatol 27, 151–161 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0661-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0661-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation