Should we use the shorter Thai-version quality of life and symptoms questionnaires in women with overactive bladder? (original) (raw)

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to test: (i) the validation and reliability of the Thai versions of overactive bladder (OAB) questionnaires (the 8-item and 3-item Overactive Bladder Symptoms Score questionnaires [OAB-v8 and OAB-v3, respectively] and the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire [OAB-q]); and (ii) the correlation of the OAB-v8, OAB-v3, and the single-question Quality of Life Questionnaire (1-QoL) to the OAB-q in Thai women with OAB. Material and Methods: During January to March 2011, 36 Thai women with OAB attending a urogynecology clinic at Chulalongkorn Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand were recruited. All questionnaires were given as a psychometric test twice, 2 weeks apart. Results: Cronbach's alpha of the OAB-v8 was higher (and above 0.7) than OAB-v3 at both week 0 and week 2. The intraclass correlations (ricc) were 0.64, 0.85, and 0.97 for the OABV8, OAB-v3, and OAB-q, respectively. The correlation coefficient (r) of OAB-v3 and OAB-q at weeks 0 and 2 (0.40 and 0.49) were lower than those for OAB-v8 and OAB-q at weeks 0 and 2 (0.62 and 0.62). All questions on the OAB-v3 had a lower weighted kappa than OAB-v8. There was no statistically significant difference in the OAB-q score in each level of 1-QoL score at week 0 (P = 0.12) and at week 2 (P = 0.29). Conclusion: The reliability of the OAB-v3 is poorer than that of the OAB-v8. The OAB-v3 is poorer correlated to the OAB-q than to the OAB-v8. A short questionnaire, such as the OAB-v3 and the 1-QoL, has poor reliability and is poorly correlated to the OAB-q and is not recommended as a replacement for the standard questionnaires, such as the OAB-q and the OAB-v8. The OAB-v3 should only be used in large screening populations where there are time limits.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (10)

  1. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M et al. The standardisation of termi- nology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Stand- ardisation Sub-Committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21: 167-178.
  2. Abrams P, Kelleher CJ, Kerr LA, Rogers RG. Overactive blad- der significantly affects quality of life. Am J Manag Care 2000; 6: S580-S590.
  3. Wein AJ, Rovner ES. Definition and epidemiology of overactive bladder. Urology 2002; 60: 7-12.
  4. Homma Y, Kakizaki H, Gotoh M, Neurogenic Bladder Society Committee. Epidemiologic survey on lower urinary tract symptoms in Japan. J Neurogen Bladder Soc 2003; 14: 266-277. (In Japanese.)
  5. Yoshimura N, Chancellor MB. Current and future pharmacolog- ical treatment for overactive bladder. J Urol 2002; 168: 1897-1913.
  6. Matza LS, Thompson CL, Krasnow J, Brewster-Jordan J, Zyczynski T, Coyne KS. Test-retest reliability of four question- naires for patients with overactive bladder: The Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q), Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC), Urgency Questionnaire (UQ), and the Pri- mary OAB Symptom Questionnaire (POSQ). Neurourol Urodyn 2005; 24: 215-225.
  7. Nixon A, Coleman S, Sabounjian L et al. A validated patient reported measure of urinary urgency severity in overactive bladder for use in clinical trials. J Urol 2005; 174: 604-607.
  8. Coyne KS, Zyczynski T, Margolis MK, Elinoff V, Roberts RG. Validation of an overactive bladder awareness tool for use in primary care settings. Adv Ther 2005; 22: 381-394.
  9. Coyne KS, Margolis MK, Bavendam T, Roberts R, Elinoff V. Validation of a 3-item OAB awareness tool. Int J Clin Pract 2011; 65: 219-224.
  10. Goode PS, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Markland AD. Incontinence in older women. JAMA 2010; 303: 2172-2181.