Assessing quality of life questionnaires in urogynaecology – tick or type?

O’Sullivan, Orfhlaith E.; Babiker, Elwaleed; Khashan, Ali S.; O’Reilly, Barry; O'Sullivan, SS

doi:10.1111/ajo.12226

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specific instruments, on the contrary, focus on single disease entities, patient groups or areas of function. 3 Disease-specific validated questionnaires, such as the pelvic floor disability index-short form 20 (PFDI-SF 20), 4 were developed to define subjective symptom severity, and they are widely used in urogynaecology. PFDI-SF 20 has 20 questions and three scales, questions one through six covering POP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Visual Analogue Scale inferior to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory for assessing symptom bother of pelvic organ prolapse?

Shek

Gillor

et al. 2021

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disease-specific validated questionnaires are used to quantify symptom severity, but they are time consuming to complete and evaluate. A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) assessment of bother is simpler and faster. The aim of this study is to compare VAS with individual and composite pelvic floor disability index-short form 20 items in predicting significant pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Methods: A retrospective analysis of data was obtained at a tertiary urogynaecological clinic between February 2017 and August 2018. All women filled out the PFDI-20 and underwent a standardised physician-directed interview, POP-Q and translabial ultrasound. Women with symptoms of POP were asked to indicate the degree of bother using a VAS. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the performance of individual Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI)-6 items, the six-item composite POPDI-6 score, and VAS in predicting significant POP on clinical and ultrasound examination. Results:The complete data sets of 231 women were analysed. Median VAS for POP was 2.9 (range 0-10). Median POPDI-6 individual and composite scores for items one to six were 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 0 (all range 0-4) and 9 (range 0-22), respectively.The majority had significant prolapse on clinical examination (n = 195, 84%) and on ultrasound (n = 192, 83%). The composite POPDI-6 prolapse score provided areas under the curve of 0.68 and 0.64 for the prediction of clinical and sonographic POP, compared to 0.74 and 0.69, respectively, for VAS. The difference was not significant

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%