Initial Validation of AUGS-PERFORM: Construct Validity and Test-Retest Reliability.

IF 0.8 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Alejandro Gómez-Viso, Nicole Díaz, Tracy Truong, Alaatin Erkanli, Nazema Siddiqui
{"title":"Initial Validation of AUGS-PERFORM: Construct Validity and Test-Retest Reliability.","authors":"Alejandro Gómez-Viso, Nicole Díaz, Tracy Truong, Alaatin Erkanli, Nazema Siddiqui","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The American Urogynecologic Society's Prolapse pERFORmance Measure (AUGS-PERFORM) patient-reported outcome measure contains 11 items designed to assess symptoms relevant for assessing the quality of treatment for pelvic organ prolapse.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to test AUGS-PERFORM's construct validity and test-retest reliability.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>For this prospective validation study, we recruited English-speaking adult participants, at a single academic institution, seeking care for pelvic organ prolapse. Participants completed AUGS-PERFORM, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory, and several Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System short forms at baseline. We compared the 11 AUGS-PERFORM items against items testing the same concepts on other questionnaires using percent agreement, kappa statistics, and linear regression to determine construct validity. Two weeks later and before any pelvic organ prolapse therapy, participants completed AUGS-PERFORM a second time. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 148 participants between 27 and 86 years of age: 81% self-identified as White, 56% were sexually active, and 84% elected surgery for treatment. The AUGS-PERFORM items assessing bulge presence and bother had a high percent agreement with the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory item #3 (83.5 and 70%, respectively). The percent agreement ranged from 69% to 75% for items assessing urinary and defecatory symptoms and from 49% to 56% for pain-related questions. Sexual function items had a strong negative correlation (expected direction based on scoring) with validated sexual function questionnaires. The intraclass correlation coefficient was estimated to be 0.86, indicating excellent test-retest reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The AUGS-PERFORM demonstrated good construct validity for prolapse, urinary incontinence, defecatory dysfunction, and sexual function questions, and moderate construct validity for pain-related questions. There was excellent test-retest reliability.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: The American Urogynecologic Society's Prolapse pERFORmance Measure (AUGS-PERFORM) patient-reported outcome measure contains 11 items designed to assess symptoms relevant for assessing the quality of treatment for pelvic organ prolapse.

Objective: The aim of the study was to test AUGS-PERFORM's construct validity and test-retest reliability.

Study design: For this prospective validation study, we recruited English-speaking adult participants, at a single academic institution, seeking care for pelvic organ prolapse. Participants completed AUGS-PERFORM, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory, and several Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System short forms at baseline. We compared the 11 AUGS-PERFORM items against items testing the same concepts on other questionnaires using percent agreement, kappa statistics, and linear regression to determine construct validity. Two weeks later and before any pelvic organ prolapse therapy, participants completed AUGS-PERFORM a second time. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results: We enrolled 148 participants between 27 and 86 years of age: 81% self-identified as White, 56% were sexually active, and 84% elected surgery for treatment. The AUGS-PERFORM items assessing bulge presence and bother had a high percent agreement with the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory item #3 (83.5 and 70%, respectively). The percent agreement ranged from 69% to 75% for items assessing urinary and defecatory symptoms and from 49% to 56% for pain-related questions. Sexual function items had a strong negative correlation (expected direction based on scoring) with validated sexual function questionnaires. The intraclass correlation coefficient was estimated to be 0.86, indicating excellent test-retest reliability.

Conclusions: The AUGS-PERFORM demonstrated good construct validity for prolapse, urinary incontinence, defecatory dysfunction, and sexual function questions, and moderate construct validity for pain-related questions. There was excellent test-retest reliability.

AUGS-PERFORM 的初步验证:结构效度和测试-重测信度。
重要性:美国泌尿妇科协会脱垂患者报告结果测量法(AUGS-PERFORmance Measure,AUGS-PERFORM)包含 11 个项目,旨在评估与盆腔器官脱垂治疗质量评估相关的症状:研究设计:在这项前瞻性验证研究中,我们在一家学术机构招募了讲英语的成年参与者,他们都是来寻求盆腔器官脱垂治疗的。参与者在基线时填写了 AUGS-PERFORM、盆底压力量表和几种患者报告结果测量信息系统简表。我们将 AUGS-PERFORM 的 11 个项目与其他问卷中测试相同概念的项目进行了比较,并采用百分比一致、卡帕统计和线性回归等方法来确定构建有效性。两周后,在接受任何盆腔器官脱垂治疗之前,参与者第二次填写 AUGS-PERFORM。使用类内相关系数评估重测可靠性:我们共招募了 148 名年龄在 27 岁至 86 岁之间的参与者,其中 81% 自我认同为白人,56% 性生活活跃,84% 选择手术治疗。AUGS-PERFORM评估隆起存在和困扰的项目与盆底困扰量表第3项的一致性很高(分别为83.5%和70%)。在评估排尿和排便症状的项目上,两者的一致率为 69% 至 75%,在疼痛相关问题上,两者的一致率为 49% 至 56%。性功能项目与有效的性功能问卷呈强负相关(基于评分的预期方向)。类内相关系数估计为 0.86,表明测试-重复可靠性极佳:结论:AUGS-PERFORM 在脱垂、尿失禁、排便功能障碍和性功能问题上表现出良好的建构效度,在疼痛相关问题上表现出中等程度的建构效度。测试重复可靠性极佳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信