Linda Bergestuen, Thomas Moger, Kjersti Oterhals, Frank Pfeffer, Torunn Nestvold, Stig Norderval, Linn Såve Nymo, Kjerstin Havnes, Kristoffer Lassen, Kyrre Breivik
{"title":"挪威语版术后恢复质量评分 QoR-15 的翻译和验证。","authors":"Linda Bergestuen, Thomas Moger, Kjersti Oterhals, Frank Pfeffer, Torunn Nestvold, Stig Norderval, Linn Såve Nymo, Kjerstin Havnes, Kristoffer Lassen, Kyrre Breivik","doi":"10.1111/aas.14322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As patient-centered care gains more attention, assessing the patient's perspective on their recovery has become increasingly important. In response to the need for a reliable and valid patient reported outcome measurement tool for major surgical resections in Norway. The Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery (NORGAST) initiated a project to translate and evaluate QoR-15's psychometric properties for patients going through general, gastrointestinal (GI), and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) resectional surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After a translation and adaption of the original version of QoR-15 into Norwegian, the QoR-15NO was psychometrically evaluated including a confirmatory factor analysis to test for unidimensionality, as well as tests for content validity, internal consistency, measurement error, construct validity, feasibility, and responsiveness. This process included cognitive interviews using a structured interview guide. Further, patients who underwent various types of GI/HPB surgery at five hospitals in different parts of Norway completed the QoR-15NO before surgery and on the first or second day after surgery. The impact of surgery was classified according to Surgical Outcome Risk Tool v2 (SORT), in extra major/complex, major, intermediate, and minor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 324 patients with 83% return rate with both pre- and postoperative forms. There were negative correlations between duration of surgery and postoperative QoR-15 score and the difference between post- and preoperative score (change score). Individuals who had gone through surgery with major impact had a lower postoperative mean QoR-15 score (97) than their counterparts who had experienced either medium (QoR-15: 110) or minor (QoR15: 119) impact surgery. Cronbach's alpha (0.88) and Omega Alpha Total (ωt = 0.90) indicate that the scale has good to very good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was measured by Intra-class Correlation Coefficient to ICC = 0.70. Confirmatory factor analyses supported that a one-factor model with correlated residuals had a good fit to data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study supports QoR-15NO as a valid, essentially unidimensional, feasible, and responsive instrument among patients undergoing general, GI, and HPB resectional surgery in Norway. The total QoR-15NO score provides important information that can be used in an everyday clinical setting and integrated into NORGAST.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"43-50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Translation and validation of the Norwegian version of the postoperative quality of recovery score QoR-15.\",\"authors\":\"Linda Bergestuen, Thomas Moger, Kjersti Oterhals, Frank Pfeffer, Torunn Nestvold, Stig Norderval, Linn Såve Nymo, Kjerstin Havnes, Kristoffer Lassen, Kyrre Breivik\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14322\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As patient-centered care gains more attention, assessing the patient's perspective on their recovery has become increasingly important. In response to the need for a reliable and valid patient reported outcome measurement tool for major surgical resections in Norway. The Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery (NORGAST) initiated a project to translate and evaluate QoR-15's psychometric properties for patients going through general, gastrointestinal (GI), and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) resectional surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After a translation and adaption of the original version of QoR-15 into Norwegian, the QoR-15NO was psychometrically evaluated including a confirmatory factor analysis to test for unidimensionality, as well as tests for content validity, internal consistency, measurement error, construct validity, feasibility, and responsiveness. This process included cognitive interviews using a structured interview guide. Further, patients who underwent various types of GI/HPB surgery at five hospitals in different parts of Norway completed the QoR-15NO before surgery and on the first or second day after surgery. The impact of surgery was classified according to Surgical Outcome Risk Tool v2 (SORT), in extra major/complex, major, intermediate, and minor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 324 patients with 83% return rate with both pre- and postoperative forms. There were negative correlations between duration of surgery and postoperative QoR-15 score and the difference between post- and preoperative score (change score). Individuals who had gone through surgery with major impact had a lower postoperative mean QoR-15 score (97) than their counterparts who had experienced either medium (QoR-15: 110) or minor (QoR15: 119) impact surgery. Cronbach's alpha (0.88) and Omega Alpha Total (ωt = 0.90) indicate that the scale has good to very good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was measured by Intra-class Correlation Coefficient to ICC = 0.70. Confirmatory factor analyses supported that a one-factor model with correlated residuals had a good fit to data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study supports QoR-15NO as a valid, essentially unidimensional, feasible, and responsive instrument among patients undergoing general, GI, and HPB resectional surgery in Norway. The total QoR-15NO score provides important information that can be used in an everyday clinical setting and integrated into NORGAST.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"43-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14322\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14322","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Translation and validation of the Norwegian version of the postoperative quality of recovery score QoR-15.
Background: As patient-centered care gains more attention, assessing the patient's perspective on their recovery has become increasingly important. In response to the need for a reliable and valid patient reported outcome measurement tool for major surgical resections in Norway. The Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery (NORGAST) initiated a project to translate and evaluate QoR-15's psychometric properties for patients going through general, gastrointestinal (GI), and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) resectional surgery.
Methods: After a translation and adaption of the original version of QoR-15 into Norwegian, the QoR-15NO was psychometrically evaluated including a confirmatory factor analysis to test for unidimensionality, as well as tests for content validity, internal consistency, measurement error, construct validity, feasibility, and responsiveness. This process included cognitive interviews using a structured interview guide. Further, patients who underwent various types of GI/HPB surgery at five hospitals in different parts of Norway completed the QoR-15NO before surgery and on the first or second day after surgery. The impact of surgery was classified according to Surgical Outcome Risk Tool v2 (SORT), in extra major/complex, major, intermediate, and minor.
Results: This study included 324 patients with 83% return rate with both pre- and postoperative forms. There were negative correlations between duration of surgery and postoperative QoR-15 score and the difference between post- and preoperative score (change score). Individuals who had gone through surgery with major impact had a lower postoperative mean QoR-15 score (97) than their counterparts who had experienced either medium (QoR-15: 110) or minor (QoR15: 119) impact surgery. Cronbach's alpha (0.88) and Omega Alpha Total (ωt = 0.90) indicate that the scale has good to very good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was measured by Intra-class Correlation Coefficient to ICC = 0.70. Confirmatory factor analyses supported that a one-factor model with correlated residuals had a good fit to data.
Conclusion: This study supports QoR-15NO as a valid, essentially unidimensional, feasible, and responsive instrument among patients undergoing general, GI, and HPB resectional surgery in Norway. The total QoR-15NO score provides important information that can be used in an everyday clinical setting and integrated into NORGAST.
期刊介绍:
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.