4.4 Article

Psychometric evaluation of a Chinese version of Lymphoedema Functioning, Disability and Health Questionnaire for Lower Limb Lymphoedema in women with gynaecological cancer surgery

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
Volume 27, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12940

Keywords

Chinese version Lymph-ICF-LL; gynaecological cancer; lower limb lymphoedema; psychometric property; questionnaire; translation

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [MOST 104-2314-B-006-014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The prevalence of lower limb lymphoedema and its impact in gynaecological cancer patients is underestimated. However, a valid and reliable scale to measure lower leg lymphoedema in Taiwan has not been available. The purpose of the study was to translate the English version of Lymphoedema Functioning, Disability and Health Questionnaire for Lower Limb Lymphoedema into a Chinese version (Lymph-ICF-LL-C), and evaluate the psychometric properties of the Lymph-ICF-LL-C in Taiwanese women with gynaecological cancer surgery. A total of 170 women with gynaecological cancer surgery were recruited to examine the Lymph-ICF-LL-C. The Lymph-ICF-LL-C shows satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alphas >= 0.84) and stability test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient >= 0.55-0.90) at a 2-week interval. Exploratory factor analysis showed that 68.53% of the total variance was explained by a five-factor solution. The concurrent validity of the Lymph-ICF-LL-C was evidenced by a significant correlation with a fatigue scale (r = 0.46, p < 0.01) and with the bilateral difference of lower limb circumference (r = 0.24-0.36, all p < 0.01). The Lymph-ICF-LL-C can be used for assessing the life impact of lower limb lymphoedema, allowing appropriate interventions to prevent further deterioration and complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available