Translation and validation of the Malay version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (M-PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (M-PFIQ-7)
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. Pelvic floor disorders substantially affect womens quality of life. The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI‐20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ‐7) are widely used patient‐reported outcome measures, but no validated Malay versions exist. Linguistic and cultural validation is essential to ensure accurate assessment of pelvic floor symptoms and their impact among Malay‐speaking women.
Objective. To translate and validate the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (M‐PFDI‐20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (M‐PFIQ‐7) questionnaires into the Malay language.
Methods. This cross‐sectional study at a public university involved 196 women who understand the Malay language. Both questionnaires underwent forward and backward translations. Subsequently, face validation was done among five women, followed by a pilot study among 30 women. Using the final version, a cross‐sectional study was done, followed by test‐retest reliability after 4 weeks.
Results. In M‐PFIQ‐7, inter‐item correlation ranged between 0.40 and 0.90 and in M‐PFDI‐20, all but nine items ranged between 0.3 to 0.6. However, as the extraction communalities for all items exceeded 0.3, no items were excluded. Both questionnaires showed no correlation between factors exceeded 0.7 and demonstrated adequate construct validity. The internal consistency for M‐PFDI‐20 and M‐PFIQ‐7 was excellent, with Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.906 and 0.976, respectively. Both showed low Cronbach’s alpha value in test‐retest analysis.
Conclusion. The Malay versions of the PFDI‐20 and PFIQ‐7 demonstrate good construct validity and excellent internal consistency, supporting their use for assessing pelvic floor distress and impact among Malay‐speaking women. However, limited test‐retest reliability suggests caution when using these instruments for longitudinal assessment.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJOG is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Good MM, Solomon ER. Pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2019;46(3):527‐ 540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2019.04.010
2. Meekins AR, Siddiqui NY. Diagnosis and management of postpartum pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2020;47(3):477‐486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2020.05.002
3. Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC. Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition‐specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185(6):1388‐1395. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2001.118659
4. Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. 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 2005;193(1):103‐113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025
5. Arouca MA, Duarte TB, Lott DA, et al. Validation and cultural translation for Brazilian Portuguese version of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ‐7) and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI‐20). Int Urogynecol J 2016;27(7):1097‐1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐015‐2938‐8
6. Chan SS, Pang SM, Lai BP, Choy KW. Quality of life and symptom measurement in Chinese women with pelvic floor disorders: Validation study of Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire. Hong Kong Med J 2017;23(Suppl 2)(3):38‐41.
7. De Tayrac R, Deval B, Fernandez H, Mares P, MAPI Research Institute. 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). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 2007;36(8):738‐748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2007.08.002
8. Due U, Brostrøm S, Lose G. Validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory‐20 and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire‐7 in Danish women with pelvic organ prolapse. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013;92(9):1041‐1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12189
9. Grzybowska ME, Griffith JW, Kenton K, et al. Validation of the Polish version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory. Int Urogynecol J 2019;30(1):101‐105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐018‐3715‐2. 10. Henn EW, Richter BW, Marokane MMP. Validation of the PFDI‐20 and PFIQ‐7 quality of life questionnaires in two African languages. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(12):1883‐1890. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00192‐017‐3318‐3
11. Teig CJ, Grotle M, Bond MJ, et al. Norwegian translation, and validation, of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI‐20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ‐7). Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(7):1005‐1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐016‐3209‐z
12. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardised assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assessment 1994;6(4):284. https://doi. org/10.1037/1040‐3590.6.4.284
13. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB. Using Multivariate Statistics. 6th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2013. 14. Danielsen AK PH‐C, Burcharth J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J. Translation of questionnaires measuring health related quality of life is not standardised: A literature based research study. PLoS
ONE 2015;10(5):e0127050. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127050
15. Yoshida M, Murayama R, Ota E, Nakata M, Kozuma S, Homma Y. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the pelvic floor distress inventory‐short form 20. Int Urogynecol J
2013;24(6):1039‐1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐012‐1962‐1
16. Utomo E, Blok BF, Steensma AB, Korfage IJ. Validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory
(PFDI‐20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ‐7) in a Dutch population. Int Urogynecol
J 2014;25(4):531‐544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐013‐2263‐z
17. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross‐cultural adaptation of health‐related quality of life
measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993;46(12):1417‐1432.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0895‐4356(93)90142‐n
18. Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, Jakobsson U. 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 2011;90(5):483‐487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600‐0412.2011.01085.x
19. Ma Y, Xu T, Zhang Y, Mao M, Kang J, Zhu L. Validation of the Chinese version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory‐20 (PFDI‐20) according to the COSMIN checklist. Int Urogynecol J 2019;30(7):1127‐1139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192‐018‐3847‐4