4.4 Article

Translation and validation of the Chinese version of Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life questionnaire in patients with kidney stones

Journal

MINERVA UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY
Volume 75, Issue 3, Pages 353-358

Publisher

EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04905-9

Keywords

Urolithiasis; Kidney calculi; Quality of life

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to develop and validate the Chinese version of the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life (WISQOL) questionnaire for patients with kidney stones. The WISQOL was translated into Chinese and analyzed for internal consistency, inter-domain correlation, and convergent validity. The Chinese version of WISQOL was found to be a reliable tool for evaluating the health-related quality of life in Chinese-speaking patients with kidney stones.
BACKGROUND: Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life (WISQOL) has been designed specifically for patients with kidney stones. The present study aimed to develop the Chinese version of WISQOL and reach its validation. METHODS: The WISQOL was translated into Chinese following a standard procedure. Kidney stone patients admitted for surgical treatment were enrolled and fulfilled both WISQOL and SF-36 on the admission day and at one month post-operatively. The internal consistency, inter-domain correlation and convergent validity were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four 124 males and 76 females were enrolled. The total WISQOL Score and SF-36 had significant correlation both preoperatively (r=0.772, P<0.01) and postoperatively (r=0.639, P<0.01). The internal consis-tency of the Chinese version WISQOL's different domains ranged from 0.766 to 0.959. The value of Spearman rank cor-relation to assess the convergent validity of different domains ranged from 0.444 to 0.687. The postoperative WISQOL raised about 20% showing a better quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese version of WISQOL questionnaire was a reliable tool to evaluate the health quality of life in Chinese-speaker patients with kidney stones. To evaluate its test-retest reliability, reliability and validity in a longer term, further studies are required.

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