Translation, Linguistic Validation, and Cultural Adaptation of the Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) Questionnaire Into the Persian (Farsi) Language and Comparing it With WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire: An Observational Study

H. Ghorbani, Monavar AfzalAghai, Salman Soltani, Mahdi Mottaghi, Mahmoud Tavakkoli, Amin Lotfi
{"title":"Translation, Linguistic Validation, and Cultural Adaptation of the Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) Questionnaire Into the Persian (Farsi) Language and Comparing it With WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire: An Observational Study","authors":"H. Ghorbani, Monavar AfzalAghai, Salman Soltani, Mahdi Mottaghi, Mahmoud Tavakkoli, Amin Lotfi","doi":"10.18502/jfrh.v17i3.13535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Whether ileal conduit diversion (ICD) or orthotopic neobladder (ONB) urinary diversion provides better quality of life (QoL) is still under debate. The Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) is a specific tool for bladder cancer (BCa) patients, providing reliable results in previous studies. A validated Farsi version of the BCI concerning cultural aspects could help Farsi-speaking clinicians gain more reliable feedback on QoL following urinary diversion. \nMaterials and methods: Based on WHO suggestions, we translated the BCI questionnaire into the Persian language. Then, we performed a cross-sectional study on BCa patients who underwent ICD or ONB urinary diversion. We compared their QoL via BCI and WHO questionnaires. Chi-square and independent t-tests were used where appropriate. \nResults: The content validity ratio and the content validity indexes were 1 and 0.8-1.0, respectively. Of 57 participants, six patients (10.5%) were women. The ICD was performed for 38 (66.7%) and ONB diversion for 19 (33.3) participants. The mean age of ICD and ONB was 68.71 ± 7.40 and 64.28 ± 8.34 years, respectively (p-value: 0.055). In all sub-domains of BCI, except bowel habits, the mean scores were higher in the ICD group. A significant difference between ICD and ONB groups was found regarding urinary function (p-value<0.001). There was no significant difference between ICD and ONB groups in none of the domains of the WHO questionnaire. \nConclusion: The QoL of ICD and ONB patients did not differ significantly. Even ICD may be superior in ritual purification, while the psychological status of ONB patients was better.","PeriodicalId":227884,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family &amp; Reproductive Health","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family &amp; Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jfrh.v17i3.13535","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Whether ileal conduit diversion (ICD) or orthotopic neobladder (ONB) urinary diversion provides better quality of life (QoL) is still under debate. The Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) is a specific tool for bladder cancer (BCa) patients, providing reliable results in previous studies. A validated Farsi version of the BCI concerning cultural aspects could help Farsi-speaking clinicians gain more reliable feedback on QoL following urinary diversion. Materials and methods: Based on WHO suggestions, we translated the BCI questionnaire into the Persian language. Then, we performed a cross-sectional study on BCa patients who underwent ICD or ONB urinary diversion. We compared their QoL via BCI and WHO questionnaires. Chi-square and independent t-tests were used where appropriate. Results: The content validity ratio and the content validity indexes were 1 and 0.8-1.0, respectively. Of 57 participants, six patients (10.5%) were women. The ICD was performed for 38 (66.7%) and ONB diversion for 19 (33.3) participants. The mean age of ICD and ONB was 68.71 ± 7.40 and 64.28 ± 8.34 years, respectively (p-value: 0.055). In all sub-domains of BCI, except bowel habits, the mean scores were higher in the ICD group. A significant difference between ICD and ONB groups was found regarding urinary function (p-value<0.001). There was no significant difference between ICD and ONB groups in none of the domains of the WHO questionnaire. Conclusion: The QoL of ICD and ONB patients did not differ significantly. Even ICD may be superior in ritual purification, while the psychological status of ONB patients was better.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
膀胱癌指数(BCI)问卷的波斯语翻译、语言验证和文化适应,并与WHO生活质量问卷进行比较:一项观察性研究
目的:回肠导管导流(ICD)和原位新膀胱导流(ONB)孰能提高患者的生活质量(QoL)仍存在争议。膀胱癌指数(BCI)是膀胱癌(BCa)患者的特异性工具,在以往的研究中提供了可靠的结果。波斯语版本的脑机接口涉及文化方面,可以帮助波斯语临床医生获得更可靠的尿分流后生活质量反馈。材料和方法:根据世界卫生组织的建议,我们将BCI问卷翻译成波斯语。然后,我们对接受ICD或ONB尿转移的BCa患者进行了横断面研究。我们通过BCI和WHO问卷比较了他们的生活质量。适当时使用卡方检验和独立t检验。结果:内容效度比为1,内容效度指标为0.8 ~ 1.0。在57名参与者中,6名患者(10.5%)是女性。38例(66.7%)患者行ICD, 19例(33.3)患者行ONB转移。ICD和ONB的平均年龄分别为68.71±7.40岁和64.28±8.34岁(p值:0.055)。除排便习惯外,ICD组BCI的所有子域平均得分均较高。ICD组和ONB组在泌尿功能方面存在显著差异(p值<0.001)。在WHO问卷调查的所有领域中,ICD组和ONB组之间没有显著差异。结论:ICD与ONB患者的生活质量无显著差异。即使是ICD也可能在仪式净化方面更胜一筹,而ONB患者的心理状态更胜一筹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Transvaginal Ultrasound Versus Bishop Score in Predicting Labour Dystocia at Full-Term Nullipara Undergoing Labour Induction Varied Clinical Presentations of Aggressive Angiomyxoma of the Vulva: A Rare Entity Increasing the Resilience of Mothers With Preterm Infant: The Effect of Kangaroo Mother Care The Role of Tumor Parenchymal and Stromal Ratios in Colorectal Cancer Translation and Evaluation of Psychometric Properties of the Persian 8-Item Internalized Transphobia (IT) Scale in Iranian Transgenders
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1