4.6 Article

Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a Postoperative Quality of Recovery Score The QoR-15

Journal

ANESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 118, Issue 6, Pages 1332-1340

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318289b84b

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Alfred Hospital
  2. Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Quality of recovery (QoR) after anesthesia is an important measure of the early postoperative health status of patients. The aim was to develop a short-form postoperative QoR score, and test its validity, reliability, responsiveness, and clinical acceptability and feasibility. Methods: Based on extensive clinical and research experience with the 40-item QoR-40, the strongest psychometrically performing items from each of the five dimensions of the QoR-40 were selected to create a short-form version, the QoR-15. This was then evaluated in 127 adult patients after general anesthesia and surgery. Results: There was good convergent validity between the QoR-15 and a global QoR visual analog scale (r = 0.68, P < 0.0005). Construct validity was supported by a negative correlation with duration of surgery (r = -0.49, P < 0.0005), time spent in the postanesthesia care unit (r = -0.41, P < 0.0005), and duration of hospital stay (r = -0.53, P < 0.0005). There was also excellent internal consistency (0.85), split-half reliability (0.78), and test-retest reliability (r(i) = 0.99), all P < 0.0005. Responsiveness was excellent with an effect size of 1.35 and a standardized response mean of 1.04. The mean +/- SD time to complete the QoR-15 was 2.4 +/- 0.8 min. Conclusions: The QoR-15 provides a valid, extensive, and yet efficient evaluation of postoperative QoR.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available