The German version of the Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life (PEmb-QoL) questionnaire: reliability, responsiveness and structural validity

被引:4
|
作者
Fischer, Simone [1 ,3 ]
Meisinger, Christine [1 ,2 ]
Linseisen, Jakob [1 ,2 ,3 ]
von Scheidt, Wolfgang [4 ]
Berghaus, Thomas M. [4 ]
Kirchberger, Inge [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Augsburg, Fac Med, Epidemiol, Stenglinstr 2, D-86156 Augsburg, Germany
[2] Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, Clin Epidemiol KEPI, Neuherberg, Germany
[3] LMU Munchen, Inst Med Informat Proc Biometry & Epidemiol IBE, Munich, Germany
[4] Univ Hosp Augsburg, Dept Cardiol Resp Med & Intens Care, Augsburg, Germany
关键词
PEmb-QoL; Pulmonary embolism; Questionnaire; Psychometric evaluation; Confirmatory factor analysis; Health-related quality of life; CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS; VALIDATION; CRITERIA; INDEX;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-022-03120-3
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose The Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life (PEmb-QoL) questionnaire is the only existing disease-specific instrument for measuring quality of life after pulmonary embolism (PE). It includes six dimensions: frequency of complaints, limitations in activities of daily living, work-related problems, social limitations, intensity of complaints and emotional complaints. The present study aimed to determine the psychometric properties including responsiveness and structural validity of the German version. Methods The analysis used data from participants of the LEA cohort study at University Hospital Augsburg. The PEmb-QoL was administered via postal surveys 3, 6 and 12 months post-PE. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated by calculating Cronbach's alpha and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Standardized response means (SRM) were calculated for investigating responsiveness. For evaluating the fit of the factor structure, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted. Results Overall, we used data from 299 patients 3 months after PE. Cronbach's alpha (0.87-0.97) and ICC (0.53-0.90) were in an acceptable to good range. SRM scores showed good responsiveness of all dimensions. CFA revealed the four-factor model including one general factor to have a good model fit. Conclusion Despite existing floor effect, most standard criteria of reliability and validity were met and indications for appropriateness of the PEmb-QoL summary score could be found. Apart from some restrictions concerning the factor structure and the dimension of social limitations, our results support the use of the PEmb-QoL questionnaire for evaluating PE-specific quality of life. Future studies should seek replication in different samples to ensure generalizability of the findings.
引用
收藏
页码:2235 / 2245
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Cross-cultural validity of the Pulmonary Embolism Quality of Life questionnaire in the quality of life survey after pulmonary embolism: A Persian-speaking cohort
    Mehdizadeh, Kasra
    Salehi, Maryam Mohseni
    Moosavi, Jamal
    Mohebbi, Bahram
    Klok, Frederikus A.
    Bikdeli, Behnood
    Shafe, Omid
    Pouraliakbar, Hamidreza
    Alizadehasl, Azin
    Farrashi, Melody
    Kaviani, Raheleh
    Mehrvarz, Farzaneh
    Rashidi, Farid
    Talakoob, Hamed
    Bakhshandeh, Hooman
    Sadeghipour, Parham
    RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2023, 7 (03)
  • [22] Validity and Reliability of the Greek Version of the Multiple Sclerosis International Quality-of-Life Questionnaire
    Triantafyllou, Nikos
    Triantafillou, Aris
    Tsivgoulis, Georgios
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROLOGY, 2009, 5 (04): : 173 - 177
  • [23] Turkish version of the Johns Hopkins Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life Questionnaire (RLS-QoL): validity and reliability study
    Sibel Güler
    F. Nesrin Turan
    Quality of Life Research, 2015, 24 : 2789 - 2794
  • [24] Validity, reliability, and factor analysis of Persian version of quality of life questionnaire for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-QOL-34)
    Masaeli, Nasrine
    Kheirabadi, Gholam Reza
    Afshar, Hamid
    Daghaghzadeh, Hamed
    Maracy, Mohammad Reza
    Assadolahi, Fatemeh
    Adibi, Peyman
    JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2013, 18 (06): : 492 - 496
  • [25] Turkish version of the Johns Hopkins Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life Questionnaire (RLS-QoL): validity and reliability study
    Guler, Sibel
    Turan, F. Nesrin
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2015, 24 (11) : 2789 - 2794
  • [26] Reliability and Validity of the German Version of the Emotional Style Questionnaire
    Jekauc, Darko
    Muelberger, Lea
    Weyland, Susanne
    Ennigkeit, Fabienne
    Wunsch, Kathrin
    Krell-Roesch, Janina
    Fritsch, Julian
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 12
  • [27] Validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change of the Thai version of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1
    Asawavichienjinda, Thanin
    Vorasayan, Pongpat
    Noiwattanakul, Jirawadee
    Phanthumchinda, Kammant
    ASIAN BIOMEDICINE, 2017, 11 (04) : 331 - 342
  • [28] Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the long-term quality of life questionnaire
    Leon-Salas, Beatriz
    Bilbao-Gonzalez, Amaia
    de Pascual y Medina, Ana Maria
    Esteva, Magdalena
    Toledo-Chavarri, Ana
    Fuentes-Sanchez, Claudio
    Bohn-Sarmiento, Uriel
    Padron-Pena, Pilar
    Gonzalez-Sanchez, Sonia
    Valcarcel-Lopez, Rafael
    del Mar Trujillo-Martin, Maria
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 14
  • [29] Turkish Version of the Chronic Urticaria Quality of Life Questionnaire: Cultural Adaptation, Assessment of Reliability and Validity
    Kocaturk, Emek
    Weller, Karsten
    Martus, Peter
    Aktas, Selin
    Kavala, Mukaddes
    Sarigul, Sukran
    Baiardini, Ilaria
    Canonica, Giorgio W.
    Brzoza, Zenon
    Kalogeromitros, Dimitrios
    Maurer, Marcus
    ACTA DERMATO-VENEREOLOGICA, 2012, 92 (04) : 419 - 425
  • [30] Reliability and Validity of the Persian Version of Quality of Life Impact of Refractive Correction Questionnaire
    Makateb, Ali
    Nabavi, Amin
    Tabrizi, Mahsa Naghash
    Hashemian, Hesam
    Shirzadi, Keyvan
    JOURNAL OF CURRENT OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2021, 33 (04): : 431 - 436