荷兰伤口-生活质量问卷的翻译与初步验证。

Q2 Medicine
Stella F Amesz, Toni M Klein, Audrey M Meulendijks, Tuong-Vi Nguyen, Christine Blome, Petrie F Roodbol, Catherine van Montfrans
{"title":"荷兰伤口-生活质量问卷的翻译与初步验证。","authors":"Stella F Amesz,&nbsp;Toni M Klein,&nbsp;Audrey M Meulendijks,&nbsp;Tuong-Vi Nguyen,&nbsp;Christine Blome,&nbsp;Petrie F Roodbol,&nbsp;Catherine van Montfrans","doi":"10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic wounds have a major impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Therefore, measuring HRQoL is an indispensable part of the treatment of patients with chronic wounds. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the Wound-QoL, a wound-specific HRQoL questionnaire, in a Dutch population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Wound-QoL was translated into Dutch according to the international standards. Patients with chronic wounds were asked to complete questionnaires at baseline (T0) and after six weeks (T1), including Wound-QoL, EQ-5D-3L (a generic questionnaire to measure HRQoL) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) measuring wound pain. If patients were not able to complete the questionnaire by themselves, it was read out to them by a nurse. Further data were obtained from medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 120 patients included, 64 (53.3%) completed the questionnaire by themselves. To 55 patients (45.8%), the questionnaire was read out. The internal consistency of the Wound-QoL global score was high at both time points (T0: Cronbach's α = 0.89, T1: Cronbach's α = 0.92). The item selectivity for global score ranged from r = 0.25 to r = 0.77 at T0 and from r = 0.40 to r = 0.79 at T1. Overall, the self-completion and read-out subgroups showed similar internal consistency and item selectivity scores. With regard to convergent validity, significant correlations were found between Wound-QoL and EQ-5D-3L (T0: r = - 0.45, p < 0.001, T1: r = - 0.50, p < 0.001) as well as between Wound-QoL and pain VAS (T0: r = 0.23, p = 0.012, T1: r = 0.37, p = 0.001) at both time points. Responsiveness analyses showed significant correlations between changes in Wound-QoL and changes in EQ-5D-3L (r = - 0.37, p < 0.001), pain VAS (r = 0.24, p = 0.044) and wound size (r = 0.24, p = 0.013). The self-completion and read-out subgroups showed differences in convergent validity and responsiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the Dutch version of the Wound-QoL has positive psychometric properties. However, more research is needed to further explore the differences between self-completed and read-out questionnaires.</p>","PeriodicalId":9014,"journal":{"name":"BMC Dermatology","volume":"20 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A translation and preliminary validation of the Dutch Wound-QoL questionnaire.\",\"authors\":\"Stella F Amesz,&nbsp;Toni M Klein,&nbsp;Audrey M Meulendijks,&nbsp;Tuong-Vi Nguyen,&nbsp;Christine Blome,&nbsp;Petrie F Roodbol,&nbsp;Catherine van Montfrans\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic wounds have a major impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Therefore, measuring HRQoL is an indispensable part of the treatment of patients with chronic wounds. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the Wound-QoL, a wound-specific HRQoL questionnaire, in a Dutch population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Wound-QoL was translated into Dutch according to the international standards. Patients with chronic wounds were asked to complete questionnaires at baseline (T0) and after six weeks (T1), including Wound-QoL, EQ-5D-3L (a generic questionnaire to measure HRQoL) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) measuring wound pain. If patients were not able to complete the questionnaire by themselves, it was read out to them by a nurse. Further data were obtained from medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 120 patients included, 64 (53.3%) completed the questionnaire by themselves. To 55 patients (45.8%), the questionnaire was read out. The internal consistency of the Wound-QoL global score was high at both time points (T0: Cronbach's α = 0.89, T1: Cronbach's α = 0.92). The item selectivity for global score ranged from r = 0.25 to r = 0.77 at T0 and from r = 0.40 to r = 0.79 at T1. Overall, the self-completion and read-out subgroups showed similar internal consistency and item selectivity scores. With regard to convergent validity, significant correlations were found between Wound-QoL and EQ-5D-3L (T0: r = - 0.45, p < 0.001, T1: r = - 0.50, p < 0.001) as well as between Wound-QoL and pain VAS (T0: r = 0.23, p = 0.012, T1: r = 0.37, p = 0.001) at both time points. Responsiveness analyses showed significant correlations between changes in Wound-QoL and changes in EQ-5D-3L (r = - 0.37, p < 0.001), pain VAS (r = 0.24, p = 0.044) and wound size (r = 0.24, p = 0.013). The self-completion and read-out subgroups showed differences in convergent validity and responsiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the Dutch version of the Wound-QoL has positive psychometric properties. However, more research is needed to further explore the differences between self-completed and read-out questionnaires.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9014,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Dermatology\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12895-020-00101-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

背景:慢性创伤对患者健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)有重要影响。因此,测量HRQoL是慢性创伤患者治疗中不可缺少的一部分。本研究的目的是在荷兰人群中翻译和验证Wound-QoL,一种伤口特异性HRQoL问卷。方法:按照国际标准将《伤口质量报告》翻译成荷兰文。慢性伤口患者分别在基线(T0)和6周后(T1)填写问卷,包括wound - qol、EQ-5D-3L(衡量HRQoL的通用问卷)和衡量伤口疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS)。如果病人不能自己完成调查问卷,则由护士向他们宣读。从医疗记录中获得了进一步的数据。结果:纳入的120例患者中,自行填写问卷的64例(53.3%)。对55例(45.8%)患者宣读问卷。两个时间点Wound-QoL整体评分的内部一致性较高(T0: Cronbach’s α = 0.89, T1: Cronbach’s α = 0.92)。整体评分的项目选择性在T0时为r = 0.25至r = 0.77,在T1时为r = 0.40至r = 0.79。总体而言,自我完成和阅读亚组显示出相似的内部一致性和项目选择性得分。在收敛效度方面,Wound-QoL与EQ-5D-3L存在显著的相关(T0: r = - 0.45, p)。结论:荷兰语版Wound-QoL具有积极的心理测量特性。然而,需要更多的研究来进一步探讨自填问卷和朗读问卷之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A translation and preliminary validation of the Dutch Wound-QoL questionnaire.

Background: Chronic wounds have a major impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Therefore, measuring HRQoL is an indispensable part of the treatment of patients with chronic wounds. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the Wound-QoL, a wound-specific HRQoL questionnaire, in a Dutch population.

Methods: The Wound-QoL was translated into Dutch according to the international standards. Patients with chronic wounds were asked to complete questionnaires at baseline (T0) and after six weeks (T1), including Wound-QoL, EQ-5D-3L (a generic questionnaire to measure HRQoL) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) measuring wound pain. If patients were not able to complete the questionnaire by themselves, it was read out to them by a nurse. Further data were obtained from medical records.

Results: Of the 120 patients included, 64 (53.3%) completed the questionnaire by themselves. To 55 patients (45.8%), the questionnaire was read out. The internal consistency of the Wound-QoL global score was high at both time points (T0: Cronbach's α = 0.89, T1: Cronbach's α = 0.92). The item selectivity for global score ranged from r = 0.25 to r = 0.77 at T0 and from r = 0.40 to r = 0.79 at T1. Overall, the self-completion and read-out subgroups showed similar internal consistency and item selectivity scores. With regard to convergent validity, significant correlations were found between Wound-QoL and EQ-5D-3L (T0: r = - 0.45, p < 0.001, T1: r = - 0.50, p < 0.001) as well as between Wound-QoL and pain VAS (T0: r = 0.23, p = 0.012, T1: r = 0.37, p = 0.001) at both time points. Responsiveness analyses showed significant correlations between changes in Wound-QoL and changes in EQ-5D-3L (r = - 0.37, p < 0.001), pain VAS (r = 0.24, p = 0.044) and wound size (r = 0.24, p = 0.013). The self-completion and read-out subgroups showed differences in convergent validity and responsiveness.

Conclusions: The results indicate that the Dutch version of the Wound-QoL has positive psychometric properties. However, more research is needed to further explore the differences between self-completed and read-out questionnaires.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Dermatology
BMC Dermatology Medicine-Dermatology
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: BMC Dermatology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of skin disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. BMC Dermatology (ISSN 1471-5945) is indexed/tracked/covered by PubMed, MEDLINE, CAS, EMBASE, Scopus and Google Scholar.
×
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