Publication: Validity and reliability of quality of recovery-35 Thai version: A prospective questionnaire-based study
Issued Date
2016-08-18
Resource Type
ISSN
14712253
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-84982262308
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
BMC Anesthesiology. Vol.16, No.1 (2016)
Suggested Citation
Siriporn Pitimana-aree, Suthipol Udompanthurak, Saowaphak Lapmahapaisan, Matula Tareerath, Aungsumat Wangdee Validity and reliability of quality of recovery-35 Thai version: A prospective questionnaire-based study. BMC Anesthesiology. Vol.16, No.1 (2016). doi:10.1186/s12871-016-0229-7 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/41224
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Validity and reliability of quality of recovery-35 Thai version: A prospective questionnaire-based study
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2016 The Author(s). Background: The quality of patients' recovery following surgery and anesthesia has been a matter of focus and concern over the past decade. The Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire was developed and validated for post-anesthesia patient evaluation. The QoR-40, however, is English-based and was tested and validated in Caucasian patients, a population that is culturally and behaviorally different from the Thai population. The objective of this study was to translate and modify the original English-language QoR-40 into the Thai language and evaluate the Quality of Recovery-35 Thai version for measuring health outcomes in Thai patients after surgery and anesthesia. Methods: Translation was performed according to internationally recognized translation standards to ensure the integrity of the translated version. Consistent with the recommendations of 25 anesthesiologists, five questions from the original QoR-40 were excluded. The 35-item questionnaire was then translated into the Thai language and renamed the Quality of Recovery-35 Thai version (Thai QoR-35). Overall, 43 outpatients and 53 inpatients rated their health and recovery status using three patient evaluation tools: 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale-Recovery (VAS-R), six-item Activities of Daily Living (ADL) questionnaire, and Thai QoR-35. Results: Overall, 90 % of patients took <10 min to complete the Thai QoR-35 questionnaire. The Thai QoR-35 and VAS-R showed good convergent validity (r=0.84, P<0.001). Discrimination validity was supported by a significant difference in mean scores for recovery among the Thai QoR-35, VAS-R, and ADL when compared between outpatients and inpatients (P<0.01) and also between baseline and postoperative values (P<0.001). The Thai QoR-35 also demonstrated good reliability with high internal consistency at three time points (Cronbach's alpha=0.88, 0.89, 0.91, respectively; P<0.01) and a split-half reliability coefficient of 0.65 (P<0.001). Conclusion: Thai QoR-35 is a valid, reliable tool for evaluating quality of recovery in Thai patients.