Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20).

Methods

One hundred and twenty-eight women with pelvic floor disorders, including pelvic organ prolapse, urinary incontinence, and anal incontinence were enrolled in the study. The Turkish version was developed using forward back translation. Construct validity was examined by correlation of clinical methods. Interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) compared the PFDI-20 and subscale scores. Cronbach’s alpha assessed the internal consistency of the Turkish version.

Results

The PFDI-20 has three subscales. The test–retest reliability of the PFDI-20 and subscale was excellent (ICC 0.96 to 0.98, p < 0.001). Cronbach’s alpha value (0.79) was moderate for the PFDI-20. Construct validity demonstrated that the PFDI-20 and each subscale displayed significant correlation with other clinical methods used (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The PFDI-20 is a valid and reliable condition-specific questionnaire for Turkish women with pelvic floor disorders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bump RC, Norton PA (1998) Epidemiology and natural history of pelvic floor dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 25:723–746

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185(6):1388–1395

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC (2005) Short forms for two condition-specific quality of life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol 193:103–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, Jakobsson U (2011) Validation of the Swedish short forms of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(5):483–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. El-Azab A, Abd-Elsayed AA, Imam HMK (2009) Patient reported and anatomical outcomes after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Neurourol Urodyn 28:219–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. De Tayrac R, Mathé ML, Bader G, Deffieux X, Fazel A, Fernandez H (2007) Development of a linguistically validated French version of two short-form, condition-specific quality of life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7) [in French]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 36:738–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Acquadro C, Jambon B, Ellis D, Marquis P (1996) Language and translations issues. In: Spilker B (ed) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 575–585

    Google Scholar 

  8. Swift S, Morris S, McKinnie V, Freeman R, Petri E, Scotti RJ et al (2006) Validation of a simplified technique for using the POPQ pelvic organ prolapse classification system. Int Urogynecol J 17:615–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Swift SE, Tate SB, Nicholas J (2003) Correlation of symptoms with degree of pelvic organ support in a general population of women: what is pelvic organ prolapse? Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:372–377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ellerkmann RM, Cundiff GW, Melick CF, Nihira MA, Leffler K, Bent AE (2001) Correlation of symptoms with location and severity of pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1332–1337

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lukacz ES, Lawrence JM, Burchette RJ, Luber KM, Nager CW, Buckwalter JG (2004) The use of Visual Analog Scale in urogynecologic research: a psychometric evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191(1):165–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cam C, Selcuk S, Asoglu MR, Tug N, Akdemir Y, Ay P, Karateke A (2011) Validation of the Wexner scale in women with fecal incontinence in a Turkish population. Int Urogynecol J 22:1375–1379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bø K, Berghmans B, Mørkved S, Kampen MV (2007) Evidence-based physical therapy for the pelvic floor: bridging science and clinical practice. Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, Oxford, pp 63–68

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wall L, DeLancey JO (1991) The politics of prolapse: a revisionist approach to disorders of the pelvic floor in women. Perspect Biol Med 34:486–496

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structures of tests. Psychometrika 3:297–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Digesu GA, Chaliha C, Salvatore S, Hutchings A, Khullar V (2005) The relationship of vaginal prolapse severity to symptoms and quality of life. BJOG 112(7):971–976

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shumaker SA, Wyman JF, Uebersax JS, McClish D, Fantl JA (1994) Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: the incontinence impact questionnaire and the urogenital distress inventory. Qual Life Res 3:291–306

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Uebersax JS, Wyman JF, Shumaker SA, McClish DK, Fantl JA (1995) Short forms to assess life quality and symptom distress for urinary incontinence in women: the incontinence impact questionnaire and the urogenital distress inventory. Neurourol Urodyn 14(2):131–139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Patrick DL, Martin ML, Bushnell DM, Yalcin I, Wagner TH, Buesching DP (1999) Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I-QOL). Urology 53:71–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Khullar V, Salvatore S (1997) A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinent women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:1374–1379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Portney LG, Watkins MP (1993) Foundation of clinical research. Application to practice. Appleton & Lange, Norwalk

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kaplan RM, Saccuzzo DP (2008) Validity. In: Psychological testing: principles, applications, and issues, 6th edn. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, pp 133–156

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Mesut Akyol from Gülhane Military Academy of Medicine for help with statistical analysis and Phylis Erdogan for her active support.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey

    Seyda Toprak Celenay

  2. Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Turkan Akbayrak & Serap Kaya

  3. Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Ergotherapy, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Gamze Ekici

  4. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Sinan Beksac

Authors
  1. Seyda Toprak Celenay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Turkan Akbayrak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Serap Kaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gamze Ekici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sinan Beksac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seyda Toprak Celenay.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 13.6 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Toprak Celenay, S., Akbayrak, T., Kaya, S. et al. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20. Int Urogynecol J 23, 1123–1127 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1729-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1729-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation