Validation of the Dutch translation of the quality of recovery-15 scale.
Outcome assessment
Patient-reported outcome measure
Postoperative period
Quality of health care
Questionnaire
Journal
BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 08 2022
01 08 2022
Historique:
received:
15
11
2021
accepted:
20
07
2022
entrez:
1
8
2022
pubmed:
2
8
2022
medline:
4
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The 15-item Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scale is strongly recommended as a standard patient-reported outcome measure assessing the quality of recovery after surgery and anesthesia in the postoperative period. This study aimed to validate the Dutch translation of the questionnaire (QoR-15NL). An observational, prospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent surgery under general anesthesia completed the QoR-15NL (preoperatively (t1) and twice postoperatively (t2 and t3)) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for general recovery at t2. A psychometric evaluation was performed to assess the QoR-15NL's validity, reliability, responsiveness, reproducibility and feasibility. Two hundred and eleven patients agreed to participate (recruitment rate 94%), and 165 patients were included (completion rate 78%). The QoR-15NL score correlated with the VAS for general recovery (rs = 0.59). Construct validity was further demonstrated by confirmation of expected negative associations between the QoR-15NL and duration of surgery (rs = -0.25), duration of Post Anesthesia Care Unit stay (rs = -0.31), and duration of hospital stay (rs = -0.27). The QoR-15NL score decreased significantly according to the extent of surgery. Cronbach's alpha was 0.87, split-half reliability was 0.8, and the test-retest intra-class coefficient was 0.93. No significant floor- or ceiling effect was observed. The QoR-15NL scale is a valid, easy-to-use, and reliable outcome assessment tool with high responsiveness for patient-reported quality of recovery after surgery and general anesthesia in the Dutch-speaking population. The QoR-15NL's measurement properties are comparable to the original questionnaire and other translated versions. not applicable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The 15-item Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scale is strongly recommended as a standard patient-reported outcome measure assessing the quality of recovery after surgery and anesthesia in the postoperative period. This study aimed to validate the Dutch translation of the questionnaire (QoR-15NL).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An observational, prospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent surgery under general anesthesia completed the QoR-15NL (preoperatively (t1) and twice postoperatively (t2 and t3)) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for general recovery at t2. A psychometric evaluation was performed to assess the QoR-15NL's validity, reliability, responsiveness, reproducibility and feasibility.
RESULTS
Two hundred and eleven patients agreed to participate (recruitment rate 94%), and 165 patients were included (completion rate 78%). The QoR-15NL score correlated with the VAS for general recovery (rs = 0.59). Construct validity was further demonstrated by confirmation of expected negative associations between the QoR-15NL and duration of surgery (rs = -0.25), duration of Post Anesthesia Care Unit stay (rs = -0.31), and duration of hospital stay (rs = -0.27). The QoR-15NL score decreased significantly according to the extent of surgery. Cronbach's alpha was 0.87, split-half reliability was 0.8, and the test-retest intra-class coefficient was 0.93. No significant floor- or ceiling effect was observed.
CONCLUSION
The QoR-15NL scale is a valid, easy-to-use, and reliable outcome assessment tool with high responsiveness for patient-reported quality of recovery after surgery and general anesthesia in the Dutch-speaking population. The QoR-15NL's measurement properties are comparable to the original questionnaire and other translated versions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
not applicable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35915438
doi: 10.1186/s12871-022-01784-5
pii: 10.1186/s12871-022-01784-5
pmc: PMC9341122
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
243Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Anesthesiology. 2013 Jun;118(6):1332-40
pubmed: 23411725
J Gen Psychol. 2003 Jul;130(3):290-304
pubmed: 12926514
Qual Life Res. 2007 Jun;16(5):815-22
pubmed: 17351823
Value Health. 2009 Jun;12(4):419-29
pubmed: 19900250
Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104
pubmed: 15804318
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):967-77
pubmed: 22152165
Anaesthesia. 2020 Jan;75 Suppl 1:e143-e150
pubmed: 31903564
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):34-42
pubmed: 17161752
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):978-88
pubmed: 22152166
Anesth Analg. 2018 May;126(5):1763-1768
pubmed: 29481436
Qual Life Res. 2018 May;27(5):1147-1157
pubmed: 29435801
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;120(1):28-36
pubmed: 29397134
Br J Anaesth. 2011 Jun;106(6):832-9
pubmed: 21558068
Br J Anaesth. 2020 Jun;124(6):761-767
pubmed: 32303379
Saudi J Anaesth. 2017 May;11(Suppl 1):S80-S89
pubmed: 28616007
Perioper Med (Lond). 2019 May 22;8:3
pubmed: 31139359
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2015 Aug;59(7):912-20
pubmed: 25867135
Anesthesiology. 2021 Nov 1;135(5):934-935
pubmed: 34543410
Patient. 2016 Jun;9(3):251-9
pubmed: 26518201
Anesthesiol Clin. 2008 Dec;26(4):613-26, v
pubmed: 19041619
Qual Life Res. 2018 May;27(5):1159-1170
pubmed: 29550964
Acta Med Port. 2015 Sep-Oct;28(5):567-74
pubmed: 26667859
Br J Anaesth. 2020 Oct;125(4):614-621
pubmed: 32703550
Anesthesiology. 2016 Jul;125(1):39-45
pubmed: 27159009
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2018 Aug;62(7):893-902
pubmed: 29417552