The EORTC QLQ-CR29 quality of life questionnaire for colorectal cancer: validation of the Dutch version

Abstract

PurposeTo validate the Dutch version of the EORTC QLQ-CR29 quality of life questionnaire for colorectal cancer.MethodsWe translated and pilot-tested the original questionnaire in the Netherlands, following EORTC guidelines. We assessed factor structure, reliability and construct validity in different samples of patients from four hospitals.ResultsOf 296 patients, 236 (80 %) returned the questionnaire, and 27 out of 48 patients returned the retest questionnaire. In addition to the original three scales, we found a reliable bowel functioning scale (α = 0.80), reducing the number of individual items by five. Two of the other scales had sufficient to good reliability (urinary frequency, α = 0.71, original α = 0.75, body image α = 0.80, original α = 0.84), the third, blood and mucus in stool, only moderate (α = 0.56, original α = 0.69). Item functioning was sufficient to excellent for all but two items (urinary incontinence and dysuria). Construct validity was similar to that in earlier studies.ConclusionWe found a very satisfactory scale for bowel problems, in patients both with and without stoma. The body image and urinary incontinence scales were reliable, and construct validity was sufficient. We suggest the questionnaire to be adapted to decrease the number of individual items, improve the scales, and therefore increase reliability of the entire questionnaire.

A large scale prospective clinical and psychometric validation of the EORTC colorectal (QLQ-CR29) module in Polish patients with colorectal cancer

“…The findings of our study are congruent with the original validation study (Whistance et al, 2009), as well as the Spanish (Arraras et al, 2011), Dutch (Stiggelbout et al, 2016), and Korean (Ihn et al, 2015) validation studies. The findings of our study are congruent with the original validation study (Whistance et al, 2009), as well as the Spanish (Arraras et al, 2011), Dutch (Stiggelbout et al, 2016), and Korean (Ihn et al, 2015) validation studies.…”

“…In our study, we assessed the validity and reliability of the Polish translation of the EORTC QLQ-CR29 in a sample of Polish patients with CRC. The findings of our study are congruent with the original validation study (Whistance et al, 2009), as well as the Spanish (Arraras et al, 2011), Dutch (Stiggelbout et al, 2016), and Korean (Ihn et al, 2015) validation studies. Our analysis found that the Polish translation of the QLQ-CR29 had test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and multi-trait results similar to the original English version of the questionnaire.…”

“…In our study, sexual functioning scores were higher than in the Korean (Ihn et al, 2015), Spanish (Arraras et al, 2011) and Dutch (Stiggelbout et al, 2016) validations. It has been suggested that these differences between studies may be attributed to cultural differences (Ihn et al, 2015).…”

Translation and Validation of the Sinhala Version of the EORTC-QLQ-CR29 Questionnaire

“…Three of the 4 scales in the questionnaire showed better internal consistency than the original article (Whistance et al, 2009) and comparable results to other translated versions (Ihn et al, 2015;Magaji et al, 2015;Stiggelbout et al, 2016;Lin et al, 2017). However, the body image scale had a low internal consistency when all 3 questions were included.…”

Patient explicit consideration of tradeoffs in decision making about rectal cancer treatment: benefits for decision process and quality of life

“…At T0, T2 and T3, we administered the EORTC QLQ-CR29 [28] to assess fecal incontinence and sexual problems. We report the six-item incontinence subscale (a ¼ 0.63-0.78; range scores, 0-100) and the two single, gender-specific items assessing sexual interest (range scores, 1-4).…”