Dataset Information

Health-related quality of life in women with endometriosis: psychometric validation of the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 questionnaire using confirmatory factor analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Study question

Which of the competing models of the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 Questionnaire (EHP-30) factor structure is best supported by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)?

Summary answer

Findings support a five-factor first-order model of the EHP-30, thereby lending support to the model originally suggested by the questionnaire developers.

What is known already

Endometriosis has a negative impact on quality of life, and measures specifically developed to address this impact, such as the EHP-30, are vital in research and disease management. Previous studies have found different models of the EHP-30 factor structure, and generated uncertainty regarding how to use the questionnaire. CFA can be applied to compare competing factor models and determine the underlying structure of a questionnaire.

Study design size duration

This cross-sectional multicenter study included 304 women with endometriosis recruited from three different public health service endometriosis clinics (referral centers for treatment of severe endometriosis) and the Danish Endometriosis Patients Association from 2014 to 2015.

Participants/materials setting methods

Diagnosis of endometriosis was confirmed in medical records for 84.2% and by histology for 66.8% of participants. Questionnaires (the licensed Danish version of the EHP-30) were sent by post two times with a 6- to 12-week interval. CFA was used to examine construct validity and Bland-Altman plots to examine test-retest reliability and the convergent validity with the Short Form 36 version 2.

Main results and the role of chance

Response rate was high (87.6%). CFA supported the original first-order five-factor structure of the EHP-30, and thereby, the use of five separate scale-scores in clinical and research practice. Visual inspection of Bland-Altman plots suggested excellent test-retest reliability of the EHP-30 and supported the use of a disease specific quality of life instrument for women with endometriosis.

Limitations reasons for caution

Diagnosis could not be confirmed through histology data in 33.2% of participants. However, subgroup analyses based on women with confirmed histology only, yielded similar results. Data related to menstrual cycle stage and the use of hormonal and pain medication during questionnaire completion were not collected. A larger study, including data from different countries on different continents, would be better designed to exclude potential population bias.

Wider implications of the findings

EHP-30, with its original five-factor structure, appears to be a valid, stable, and specific quality of life measure for women with endometriosis. It seems easy to understand, quick to administer, and importantly, scoring might be unaffected by cyclical/menstrual pain symptoms related to endometriosis. The finding of a five-factor model from different studies across several countries supports the crosscultural validity of the EHP-30.

Study funding/competing interests

This work was supported by the Danish Endometriosis Association, which is a nongovernmental organization run by women with endometriosis and by a scholarship from the Health Research Fund of Central Denmark Region. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Trial registration number

The Danish Data Protection Agency (J.nr: 2013-41-2264).

SUBMITTER: Hansen KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8725642 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the psychometric characteristics of the 1-month recall Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire (UFS-QOL), including the Revised Activities subscale.MethodsVENUS I and II were phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of ulipristal acetate in women with uterine fibroids (UF) and abnormal uterine bleeding. Women completed the 1-month recall UFS-QOL at baseline and after 12 weeks' treatment. Uterine bleeding was assessed via a daily diary (both studies); the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale (PGI-I) was completed in VENUS II. Psychometric analyses examined internal consistency reliability and construct validity of the UFS-QOL; confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) compared model fit of the original and Revised Activities subscales. Analyses were conducted separately for VENUS I and II.ResultsOne hundred and fifty-seven patients in VENUS I and 429 in VENUS II were included. Changes in mean Symptom Severity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scale scores indicated symptom burden reductions and HRQoL improvements. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were high at baseline and after 12 weeks' treatment (all ≥0.76, meeting the >0.70 threshold), demonstrating strong internal consistency reliability. Correlations between UFS-QOL scores and bleeding diary responses (range: -0.35 to -0.63), and UFS-QOL scores and PGI-I responses (range: -0.48 to -0.70), ranged from moderate to strong after 12 weeks' treatment (all p < 0.0001). Patients with absence of bleeding or controlled bleeding after 12 weeks' treatment scored significantly better (p < 0.001) on each UFS-QOL scale than patients not achieving those end points, supporting construct validity. CFA confirmed model fit for the Revised Activities subscale.ConclusionsThe 1-month recall UFS-QOL, including the Revised Activities subscale, is a valid, reliable measure to assess UF symptoms and their impact on HRQoL.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02147197 . Registered May 26, 2014; retrospectively registered. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02147158 . Registered May 26, 2014; retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundThere is considerable burden of illness in hereditary angioedema (HAE). However, instruments to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in HAE are limited. The Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire (AE-QoL) was developed to measure HRQoL in patients with recurrent angioedema; the validity of the AE-QoL in patients with HAE is described.MethodsTo identify disease-related experiences with a focus on the impact of HAE on HRQoL, interviews were conducted with a group of clinician experts and patients with HAE from Canada, France, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, along with a targeted literature review. Concepts were mapped to the AE-QoL to assess item relevance, interpretation, and conceptual coverage. Cognitive interviews assessed item clarity and relevance. A psychometric validation was performed using data from a phase 3 trial.ResultsInterviews were conducted with seven clinicians and 40 adult patients. Patients reported 35 unique impacts of HAE on their lives, the most frequent being on work/school, social relationships, physical activities, and emotions, particularly fear/worrying and anxiety. Saturation for these impacts was reached, and all concepts covered in the AE-QoL were reported during the interviews. Patients agreed that the questionnaire items and response options were clear and relevant, and the 4-week recall period was appropriate. The psychometric validation included data from 64 patients. For AE-QoL total scores, excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.90), test-retest reliability (intraclass coefficient > 0.80), convergent validity with the Sheehan Disability Scale (r = 0.663), divergent validity with the EQ-5D-5L index (r = 0.292) and EQ-VAS (r = 0.337), and known-groups validity (p < 0.0001; ɳ2 = 0.56) were demonstrated.ConclusionsQualitative and psychometric analyses showed that the AE-QoL is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring HRQoL in adult patients with HAE from six countries.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) is a commonly used instrument in the evaluation of fibromyalgia (FM) patients. Over the last 18 years, since the publication of the original FIQ, several deficiencies have become apparent and the cumbersome scoring algorithm has been a barrier to widespread clinical use. The aim of this paper is to describe and validate a revised version of the FIQ: the FIQR. METHODS: The FIQR was developed in response to known deficiencies of the FIQ with the help of a patient focus group. The FIQR has the same 3 domains as the FIQ (that is, function, overall impact and symptoms). It differs from the FIQ in having modified function questions and the inclusion of questions on memory, tenderness, balance and environmental sensitivity. All questions are graded on a 0-10 numeric scale. The FIQR was administered online and the results were compared to the same patient's online responses to the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the original FIQ. RESULTS: The FIQR was completed online by 202 FM patients, 51 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients (31 RA and 20 SLE), 11 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 213 healthy controls (HC). The mean total FIQR score was 56.6 +/- 19.9 compared to a total FIQ score of 60.6 +/- 17.8 (P < 0.03). The total scores of the FIQR and FIQ were closely correlated (r = 0.88, P < 0.001). Each of the 3 domains of the FIQR correlated well with the 3 related FIQ domains (r = 0.69 to 0.88, P < 0.01). The FIQR showed good correlation with comparable domains in the SF-36, with a multiple regression analysis showing that the three FIQR domain scores predicted the 8 SF-36 subscale scores. The FIQR had good discriminant ability between FM and the 3 other groups; total FIQR scores were HC (12.1 +/- 11.6), RA/SLE (28.6 +/- 21.2) and MDD (17.3 +/- 11.8). The patient completion time was 1.3 minutes; scoring took about 1 minute. CONCLUSIONS: The FIQR is an updated version of the FIQ that has good psychometric properties, can be completed in less than 2 minutes and is easy to score. It has scoring characteristics comparable to the original FIQ, making it possible to compare past FIQ results with future FIQR results.