Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 3/2014

01-04-2014

Validation of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire adapted to Brazilian Portuguese

Auteurs: Suemy Cioffi Izu, Eduardo Macoto Kosugi, Alessandra Stanquini Lopes, Karen Vitols Brandão, Leonardo Bomediano Garcia Sousa, Vinícius Magalhães Suguri, Luis Carlos Gregório

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 3/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to validate the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire adapted to the Brazilian Portuguese.

Method

A prospective study was conducted with ROE administration to 56 patients submitted to rhinoplasty (preoperatively, and then 15-day and 90-day postoperatively) and 100 volunteers without the need or desire of cosmetic or functional nasal surgery. Reliability (internal consistency and test–retest reproducibility), validity, responsiveness and clinical interpretability were assessed.

Results

Rhinoplasty patients’ mean preoperative score was 7.14, 15 days post-op 17.73 and 90 days post-op 20.50, while controls presented 17.94 points (p < 0.0001), showing the questionnaire’s validity and responsiveness. Internal consistency was 0.86. Inter- and intra-examiner test–retest reproducibility was 0.90 and 0.94, respectively. The effect size caused by the surgery was considered large (15 days post-op compared to the preoperative score: effect size = 3.22; 90 days post-op compared to preoperative score: effect size = 4.06). The minimally important difference was 8.67 points, so changes smaller than 9 points in ROE might not be perceived by the patient as an improvement or worsening.

Conclusion

The Brazilian Portuguese version of ROE is a valid instrument to assess results in rhinoplasty patients.
vorige artikel Quality of life for parents of children with influenza-like illness: development and validation of Care-ILI-QoL
volgende artikel Understanding social forces involved in diabetes outcomes: a systems science approach to quality-of-life research
Literatuur
1.
Moolenburgh, S. E., Mureau, M. A., & Hofer, S. O. (2008). Aesthetic outcome after nasal reconstruction: Patient versus panel perception. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 61(12), 1459–1464.CrossRef
2.
Alsarraf, R. (2000). Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: A review and new directions. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 23(3), 192–197.CrossRef
3.
Hopkins, C. (2009). Patient reported outcome measures in rhinology. Rhinology, 47(1), 10–17.PubMed
4.
5.
The WHOQOL Group. (1998). The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science and Medicine, 46(12), 1569–1585.CrossRef
6.
Alsarraf, R., Larrabee, W. F., Anderson, S., Murakami, C. S., & Johnson, C. S, Jr. (2001). Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: A pilot study. Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery, 3(3), 198–201.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Izu, S. C., Kosugi, E. M., Brandão, K. V., Lopes, A. S., Garcia, L. B., Suguri, V. M., et al. (2012). Normal values for the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 78(4), 76–79.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417–1432.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.CrossRef
10.
Kosugi, E. M., Chen, V. G., Fonseca, V. M., Cursino, M. M., Mendes-Neto, J. A., & Gregório, L. C. (2011). Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT): 22 to Brazilian Portuguese. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 77(5), 663–669.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Hopkins, C., Gillett, S., Slack, R., Lund, V. J., & Browne, J. P. (2009). Psychometric validity of the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test. Clinical Otolaryngology, 34(5), 447–454.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments : Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11(3), 193–205.CrossRef
13.
Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989). Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials, 10(4), 407–415.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Klatchoian, D. A., Len, C. A., Terreri, M. T., Silva, M., Itamoto, C. H., Ciconelli, R. M., et al. (2008). Quality of life of children and adolescents from São Paulo: reliability and validity of the Brazilian version of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Jornal de Pediatria, 84(4), 308–315.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Fonseca, E. S., Camargo, A. L., Castro, R. A., Sartori, M. G., Fonseca, M. C., Lima, G. R., et al. (2005). Validation of a quality of life questionnaire (King′s Health Questionnaire) in Brazilian women with urinary incontinence. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, 27(5), 235–242.CrossRef
16.
Weinberger, M., Oddone, E. Z., Samsa, G. P., & Landsman, P. B. (1996). Are health-related quality-of-life measures affected by the mode of administration? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(2), 135–140.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health (Oxford, England), 27(3), 281–291.CrossRef
18.
Sutton, C. J., Watkins, C. L., Cook, N., Leathley, M. J., McAdam, J., & Dey, P. (2013). Postal and face-to-face administration of stroke outcome measures: Can mixed modes be used? Stroke, 44(1), 217–219.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Hellings, P. W., & Nolst Trenité, G. J. (2007). Long-term patient satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. The Laryngoscope, 117(6), 985–989.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Arima, L. M., Velasco, L. C., & Tiago, R. S. (2012). Influence of age on rhinoplasty outcomes evaluation: A preliminary study. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 36(2), 248–253.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Faidiga, G. B., Carenzi, L. R., Yassuda, C. C., Silveira, F., Lago, T. D., Leite, M. G., et al. (2010). Long-term evaluation in aesthetic rhinoplasty in an academic referral center. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 76(4), 437–441.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Meningaud, J. P., Lantieri, L., & Bertrand, J. C. (2008). Rhinoplasty: An outcome research. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 121(1), 251–257.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Arima, L. M., Velasco, L. C., & Tiago, R. S. (2011). Crooked nose: Outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 77(4), 510–515.PubMedCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Validation of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire adapted to Brazilian Portuguese
Auteurs
Suemy Cioffi Izu
Eduardo Macoto Kosugi
Alessandra Stanquini Lopes
Karen Vitols Brandão
Leonardo Bomediano Garcia Sousa
Vinícius Magalhães Suguri
Luis Carlos Gregório
Publicatiedatum
01-04-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0539-x

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2014

Quality of Life Research 3/2014 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Quality of life for parents of children with influenza-like illness: development and validation of Care-ILI-QoL

OriginalPaper

Psychometric evaluation of the hepatitis C virus patient-reported outcomes (HCV-PRO) instrument: validity, responsiveness, and identification of the minimally important difference in a phase 2 clinical trial

Editorial

Measuring pediatric patient-reported outcomes: good progress but a long way to go

OriginalPaper

The Spanish version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) is valid for use in the general population

OriginalPaper

Qualitative development of the ‘Questionnaire on Pain caused by Spasticity (QPS),’ a pediatric patient‐reported outcome for spasticity‐related pain in cerebral palsy

OriginalPaper

Preliminary reliability and validity of Persian version of the Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI)