Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20

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

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to translate the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-Short Form 20 (PFDI-20) into Japanese and test its reliability and validity among Japanese women.

Methods

Fifty-nine women with and without pelvic floor disorders (age 55.8 ± 16.8 years, mean ± SD) completed the Japanese PFDI-20 (J-PFDI-20) questionnaire at baseline and 2 weeks later. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Bland and Altman method for test-retest reliability and Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency of the J-PFDI-20 were used. Scores of total and subscales were compared between women with and without pelvic floor disorders for known-groups validity. Spearman’s correlation coefficients between the J-PFDI-20 and the severity of pelvic floor disorders and Urinary Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (I-QOL) were used for construct validity.

Results

The PFDI-20 was successfully translated from English into Japanese with face validity through rigorous cross-cultural validation. Test-retest reliability of the J-PFDI-20 and three subscales was good to excellent (ICC = 0.77–0.90). The Bland and Altman analysis showed that differences between the first and second scores of total J-PFDI-20 and its subscales were not significantly different from 0 and largely fell within the range of 0 ± 1.96 SD. Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.52–0.83. Analysis of known-groups validity showed differences in scores of the J-PFDI-20 between women with and without pelvic floor disorders. Acceptable construct validity was found in J-PFDI-20 total and subscale scores with positive correlations to severity of pelvic floor disorders (ρ > 0.35) and negative correlations to I-QOL (ρ < -0.39).

Conclusions

The results suggest that the J-PFDI-20 is a reliable and valid condition-specific quality of life instrument for 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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. de Mello Portella P, Feldner PC Jr, da Conceição JC, Castro RA, Sartori MG, Girão MJ (2012) Prevalence of and quality of life related to anal incontinence in women with urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 160:228–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fujimura T, Kume H, Tsurumaki Y et al (2011) Core lower urinary tract symptom score (CLSS) for the assessment of female lower urinary tract symptoms: a comparative study. Int J Urol 18:778–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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. Continence Program in Women (CPW) Research Group. Qual Life Res 3:291–306

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 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 

  5. Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW et al (2000) Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 43:9–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Robinson D, Salvatore S (2005) P-QOL: a validated questionnaire to assess the symptoms and quality of life of women with urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16:176–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Homma Y, Ando T, Yoshida M et al (2002) Validation of the Japanese version of QOL questionnaires for urinary incontinence (in Japanese). Low Urin Tract Symptoms 13:247–257

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ogata H, Mimura T, Hanazaki K (2012) Validation study of the Japanese version of the Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale. Colorectal Dis 14:194–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan SS, Cheung RY, Yiu AK et al (2011) Chinese validation of Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 22:1305–1312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Omotosho TB, Hardart A, Rogers RG, Schaffer JI, Kobak WH, Romero AA (2009) Validation of Spanish versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ): a multicenter validation randomized study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20:623–639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC (2005) Short forms of 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 

  13. Barber MD, Chen Z, Lukacz E et al (2011) Further validation of the short form versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ). Neurourol Urodyn 30:541–546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 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 90:483–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. de Tayrac R, Deval B, Fernandez H, Marès P, Mapi Research Institute (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 (Paris) 36:738–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McDermott CD, Terry CL, Mattar SG, Hale DS (2012) Female pelvic floor symptoms before and after bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 22:1244–1250. doi:10.1007/s11695-012-0592-5

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mathlouthi N, Elloumi J, Trabelsi H et al (2011) Anatomic and functional results after surgical treatment of urogenital prolapse: prospective study about 93 cases (in French). Tunis Med 89:896–901

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim YH, Kim JJ, Kim SM, Choi Y, Jeon MJ (2011) Association between metabolic syndrome and pelvic floor dysfunction in middle-aged to older Korean women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:71.e1–71.e8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Fayers PM, Machin D (2007) Quality of life: the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  21. Asfaw TS, Saks EK, Northington GM, Arya LA (2011) Is pelvic pain associated with defecatory symptoms in women with pelvic organ prolapse? Neurourol Urodyn 30:1305–1308

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Raza-Khan F, Cunkelman J, Lowenstein L, Shott S, Kenton K (2010) Prevalence of bowel symptoms in women with pelvic floor disorders. Int Urogynecol J 21:933–938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was part of a research project funded by the Japanese Association for Sex Education in 2009. The authors are grateful to the participants for their cooperation. The authors would like to thank Dr. Tetsuya Fujimura, M.D., Ph.D., and Dr. Yuzuri Tsurumaki Sato, M.D., Ph.D., at the Department of Urology, The University of Tokyo, for their assistance throughout this study.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gerontological Nursing/Wound Care Management, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan

    Mikako Yoshida

  2. Department of Nursing, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

    Ryoko Murayama

  3. Department of Global Health Policy, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Erika Ota

  4. Department of OB/GYN, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

    Maki Nakata

  5. Department of OB/GYN, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Shiro Kozuma

  6. Department of Urology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Yukio Homma

Authors
  1. Mikako Yoshida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ryoko Murayama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erika Ota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maki Nakata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shiro Kozuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yukio Homma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mikako Yoshida.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yoshida, M., Murayama, R., Ota, E. et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20. Int Urogynecol J 24, 1039–1046 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1962-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1962-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation