The Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire (EHP-5): psychometric validity assessment of a Croatian version

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1627557/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

The Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire (EHP-5): psychometric validity assessment of a Croatian version

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1627557/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Purpose: To translate, adapt and validate the Endometriosis Health Profile-5 (EHP-5) in Croatian population.

Methods: This validation study is a part of a prospective, observational study (EHP-5 CRO) with aim of implementation of EHP-5 and to provide better insight in quality of life consideration of women with endometriosis in Croatian clinical practice. A 150 consecutive patients with surgically proven endometriosis were enrolled. The translation to Croatian followed standardized procedure. Cronbach's Alpha was calculated to calculate internal consistency reliability of EHP-5. The test-retest reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The t-test for independent samples was used to assess known-groups validity.

Results: Both EHP-5 core and EHP-5 modular parts of the questionnaire had good internal consistency, assessed by the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient (α=0.793 and α=0.842, respectively). Obtained results indicate very good reliability for core as well as for modular part of EHP-5 questionnaire (ICC=0.896 and 0.936, respectively). The independent t-test showed that women who reported their pain with VAS scale 7 or more had significantly higher results (p<0.001) on EHP-5 (M=50.63) compared with women who reported their pain 6 or less (M=26.91). Furthermore, we found statistically significant difference between women who are infertile with women who are fertile (p<0.001), whereby infertile women had higher average result on EHP-5 (M=49.55) compared with fertile women (M=34.36).

Conclusion: The Croatian version of the EHP-5 have very good psychometric characteristics and can be used as a reliable tool for assessing patients with endometriosis in everyday clinical practice.

Endometriosis presents one of the most common chronic gynecological conditions associated with cyclic pelvic pain, infertility or both [1, 2]. It affects approximately 20% women hospitalized for pelvic pain and 50% of infertile women [3]. There is a median delay of eight years from first symptom onset to an endometriosis diagnosis which causes a negative impact on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) [4]. The symptoms of endometriosis vary from mild to severe, but in most cases, women suffering from endometriosis are exposed to monthly intake of analgesics and generally have a poorer HRQoL. Nevertheless, the typical recurrent lower abdominal pain, possible side effects of treatment and lack of understanding by other people have significant negative impact on the personal and psychosocial status of patients’ daily life [5, 6]. Given that numerous studies have confirmed an association between endometriosis and poor HRQoL, disease-specific instruments were needed to be developed to assess the aspects of quality of life affected by a specific disease or disorder [7]. Two decades ago, Jones and associates published the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30), one of the first standardized, disease specific instrument that evaluates the HRQoL in women with endometriosis [8]. Although the EHP-30 questionnaire demonstrated high reliability and validity, it presents a lengthy measure [8, 9]. In order to overcome time impracticality of EHP-30, same group of authors developed Endometriosis Health Profile-5 (EHP-5) [10]. The EHP-5 questionnaire is proved to be a reliable and valid questionnaire with its special feature in clinical settings where an expeditious endometriosis health status measure is required [10–14].

In the Croatian language, there is no validated questionnaire for evaluating the impact of endometriosis on quality of life. The present study was conducted with the aim to translate, adapt and validate the EHP-5 in Croatia.

Participants and study design

A prospective observational study was conducted between July 2019 and August 2020 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Center Zagreb, Croatia. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board and all participants gave their written consent before inclusion. This validation study is a part of a prospective, observational study (EHP-5 CRO) with aim of implementation of EHP-5 and to provide better insight in quality of life consideration of women with endometriosis in Croatian clinical practice. Since our Department has almost 250 operative procedures annually which include ovarian, pelvic and/or extra pelvic endometriosis, we believe that this study will bring new tool not only for preoperative assessment but postoperative surveillance. The study has been previously registered and described at clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04491305). To be eligible for participation, subjects are required to fulfill the following conditions: 1) females 18 years or older; 2) pathohistologically confirmed endometriosis after surgical treatment or indicated diagnostic laparoscopy; 3) fluent and literate in Croatian language; and 4) ability to independently understand the questions in the questionnaires. The following are the exclusion criteria: 1) neurological or psychiatric disorders (e.g. epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, depression, schizophrenia); 2) diagnosed vulvodynia and active vulvovaginitis; 3) pregnancy; 4) any form of prior conservative and/or surgical treatment for endometriosis; 5) missing data in any of the responses of the core part of questionnaire and 6) lack of informed consent.

Questionnaires

Endometriosis Health Profile-5 (EHP-5) is a reliable and valid self-report questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life in endometriosis, reffering to the 4 previous weeks. The first part of the questionnaire consists 5 items about pain, control and powerlesness, emotions, social support and self image. The second part contains 6 items about work life, relation with children, sexual intercourse, medical profession, treatment and infertility. Items are scored from 0 (never) to 4 (always). Total score is then transformed on a scale with a range 0 to 100, with the latter indicating worst possible health status [10, 11, 13].

Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale – 21 (DASS-21) is a 21-item scale designed to assess emotional states of depression, anxiety and stress [15, 16]. Each of those three subscales is based on 7 items, which are all scored from 0 (did not apply to me at all) to 3 (applied to me very much or most of the time). The total score for each one of the subscales is obtained by summing 7 items and then multiplying them by 2. A higher result indicate higher degree of emotional states of depression, anxiety and stress. The questionnaire has been translated and validated to Croatian and showed very good psychometric characteristics [17].

Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a self-report unidimensional measure of pain intensity. A 100 milimeters line represents the continuum from 0 mm (abscence of pain) to 100 mm (unbearable pain). Scores are expressed by measuring the line in millimeters, with results ranging from 0 to 100. The scale has been widely used in diverse adult populations, including those with women suffering from endometriosis [18, 19].

Translation and culture adaptation

The translation to Croatian followed standardized procedure in which expert group, consisted of two gynecologists, a methodologist and an authorized translator, ensured cross-cultural equivalence of questionnaire. The initial translation was carried out independently by the two gynecologists, expert in field of gynecological surgery. They met and discussed discrepancies in translation and created a new, joint version of EHP-5 questionnaire afterwards. A new version was then sent to an authorized translator who did not have access to the original version. Finally, an expert group have reviewed all versions of the translations and concluded that there were no major discrepancies and to ensure that the final version of a translated questionnaire is culturally congruent. Preliminary pilot-testing was conducted on a small sample (N = 20) in order to check if participants understood questions and were asked for suggestions on how to improve the questionnaire. Preliminary results showed that all items from EHP-5 were easily understandable and that the questionnaire was well received. The Croatian version of EHP-5 were then established (Appendix).

Statistical analysis

Continuous data is presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), while discrete data is presented as frequencies and percentage. Cronbach's Alpha was calculated to calculate internal consistency reliability of EHP-5. The test-retest reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The t-test for independent samples was used to assess known-groups validity, a type of construct validity, where was explored the ability of the EHP-5 questionnaire to reflect differences between groups who are expected to differ due to their known characteristics. Concurrent validity, a type of criterion validity, was computed in order to assess similar domains between newly translated EHP-5 questionnaire and already known existing measures (VAS and DASS-21). Therefore, Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated in order to examine the strength of the relationship between similar items from EHP-5 with VAS and DASS-21 subscales. Significance level was set as p < 0.05. Data analysis was perfomed using SPSS 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).

Sample characteristics

During the study period, 150 consecutive women with surgically proven endometriosis were enrolled. Among them, 27 women did not fulfill inclusion criteria and 12 women refused to participate. Final analysis included 111 women who completed questionnaires at the initial visit (T₀) and 81 of them completed questionnaires again two weeks after on a control visit or via e-mail (T₁). Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Demographic and clinical data.
	min – max	M ± sd
Age	19–52	34.98 ± 6.784
Bodyweight	49–105	65.43 ± 10.900
BMI	16.8–39.5	23.56 ± 4.411

	0	1	2	3	4
Parity	64 (57.7%)	25 (22.5%)	17 (15.3%)	4 (3.6%)	1 (0.9%)
Cesarean delivery	97 (87.4%)	12 (10.8%)	2 (1.8%)

		Primary school	High school	University
Education		28 (25.2%)	37 (33.3%)	46 (41.5%)

	NO	YES
Employment	12 (10.8%)	99 (89.2%)

	Single	Married	Divorced
Marital status	21 (18.9%)	80 (72.1%)	10 (9.0%)

	NO	YES
Prior contraceptive use	79 (71.2%)	32 (28.8%)

	NO	YES
Primary sterility	78 (70.3%)	33 (29.7%)

	1	2	3	4
rASM stage	29 (26.1%)	59 (53.2%)	20 (18.0%)	3 (2.7%)

	NO	YES
DIE	95 (85.6%)	16 (14.4%)

Reliability

As seen from Table 2, both EHP-5 core and EHP-5 modular parts of the questionnaire had good internal consistency, assessed by the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient (α = 0.793 and α = 0.842, respectively). Furthermore, test-retest reliability was computed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), with 81 patients completing EHP-5 on two time points: baseline and two weeks after. Obtained results indicate very good reliability for core as well as for modular part of EHP-5 questionnaire (0.896 and 0.936, respectively).

Table 2

Cronbach's Alpha internal consistency and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient reliability
	Number of items	Cronbach's Alpha	Test-retest reliability ICC
EHP-5 CORE	5	0.793	0.896 (95% CI 0.859–0.927)
EHP-5 MODULAR	6	0.842	0.936 (95% CI 0.881–0.972)

Construct validity

Known-groups validity was carried out to test the validity of EHP-5 (Table 3). We hypothesized that women who report less pain with VAS scale and who are infertile will report lower quality of life measured by the EHP-5 questionnaire. The independent t-test showed that women who reported their pain with VAS scale 7 or more had significantly higher results (p < 0.001) on EHP-5 (M = 50.63) compared with women who reported their pain 6 or less (M = 26.91). Furthermore, we found statistically significant difference between women who are infertile with women who are fertile (p < 0.001), whereby infertile women had higher average result on EHP-5 (M = 49.55) compared with fertile women (M = 34.36).

Concurrent validity

Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating VAS and DASS-21 subscales, which both have very good psychometric properties in Croatian, with EHP-5 core items (Table 4). We found statistically significant high correlation between similar domains – 1st item on EHP-5 questionnaire that measures pain with VAS scale (r = 0.766, p < 0.01). Furthermore, 3rd item (mood swings during the last 4 weeks because of endometriosis) moderately correlated with depressive and anxiety subscales from DASS-21 indicating that women who had more often mood swings have also reported more depressive and anxious symptoms (r = 0.560 and r = 0.486, respectively).

Table 3

Construct validity – known-groups comparisons
	EHP-5 M ± sd	t-statistic	p-value
Pain VAS
<7 (N = 55)	26.91 ± 18.571	-6.598	< 0.001
≥7 (N = 56)	50.63 ± 19.284	-6.598	< 0.001
Infertility
No (N = 78)	34.36 ± 22.868	-3.884	< 0.001
Yes (N = 33)	49.55 ± 16.834	-3.884	< 0.001

Table 4. Concurrent validity – correlation coefficients between EHP-5 items, VAS and DASS-21 subscales

	1	2	3	4	5	VAS	DEPR	ANX	STR
1	1.000	0.497^**	0.138	0.251^**	0.417^**	0.766^**	0.200^*	0.184	0.299^**
2		1.000	0.401^**	0.530^**	0.491^**	0.645^**	0.389^**	0.204^*	0.384^**
3			1.000	0.616^**	0.579^**	0.127	0.560^**	0.486^**	0.602^**
4				1.000	0.527^**	0.247^**	0.450^**	0.386^**	0.513^**
5					1.000	0.394^**	0.419^**	0.284^**	0.533^**
VAS						1.000	0.165	0.108	0.275^**
DEPR							1.000	0.566^**	0.686^**
ANX								1.000	0.687^**
STR									1.000
*p < 0.01; p < 0.05

The present study provides validity and reliability evidence to support the use of the Croatian version of the EHP-5 in everyday monitoring and measuring HRQoL of women with endometriosis. Our findings, although with negligible distinctions, are principally consistent with only three other EHP-5 cross-cultural adaptations and psychometric evaluations published to date [11, 14, 20]. It is important to emphasize that we have demonstrated very good internal consistency and test-retest reliability of both core and modular part of questionnaire. Moreover, our study signifies pain and infertility as the most detrimental factors on overall quality of life among Croatian women with endometriosis.

In order to avoid a risk of spectrum bias, we have included consecutive patients with pathohistologically proven endometriosis. The rationale for not involving asymptomatic controls in this study was to display EHP-5 performance as true as possible. In the French version of EHP-5 psychometric evaluation, Fauconnier and associates have used purposeful sampling design from two different medical centres in order to have better EHP-5 discriminative validity analysis [20]. Although limitations are inevitable in creating the most favourable target population sample, methodological consensus is still lacking [21].

Another debatable issue is optimal EHP-5 scoring method since there is no precise recommendation from original questionnaire developers [10]. We have adopted evaluation of the dimensional aspect of the EHP-5 separately for the core and the modular part which is consistent to the Turkish and Iranian study [11, 14]. In opposition to separate dimensional aspect evaluation, French EHP-5 version developers have merged all the ratings from core and modular part of questionnaire [20]. A similar scoring method was applied in retrospective study which have estimated impact of laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis on HRQoL [12]. Regardless of implemented scoring method, all abovementioned studies, including ours, have found adequate internal consistency [11, 14, 20].

In terms of internal consistency, our findings are nearly equivalent to Turkish study, showing very good Cronbach's Alpha coefficient of both core and modular part of EHP-5 [11]. This similarity can be explained by comparable initial study setting, inclusion/exclusion criteria and final distribution of disease severity in analyzed sample. Excellent internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.92) reported by Fauconnier et al. should be interpreted with caution, suggesting that some questionnaire items may be redundant [22]. The evaluation of the core and modular part of questionnaires with 2-week test–retest reliability was performed by Turkish authors using Pearson's product moment correlation coefficient, revealing very good consistence across repeated administration of questionnaire [11]. Their findings are consistent with ours although we have evaluated 2-week test–retest reliability via ICC. Other two published EHP-5 validation studies did not assess test-retest reliability [14, 20].

Our study has demonstrated that pain and infertility had the highest possible negative impact on quality of life for patients with endometriosis which is consistent with findings of Turkish and Iranian authors [11, 14]. However, possible cultural differences and baseline characteristics of sample population determined different responding pattern in French validation study, emphasizing sexual intercourse as one of the most detrimental factors on overall quality of life among patients with endometriosis [20].

In conclusion, the Croatian version of the EHP-5 was successfully translated, adapted and validated so the questionnaire is now ready for use as a reliable tool for assessing patients with endometriosis in everyday clinical practice. We believe that this validation study will encourage more researches in field of endometriosis preoperative assessment and postoperative surveillance using EHP-5. This short and simple tool will certainly successfully replace current lack of biomedical markers in tracking the progression of endometriosis.

Funding

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Acknowledgments

None.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Mislav Mikuš, Luka Matak, Goran Vujić, Bernarda Škegro and Ivan Škegro. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Mislav Mikuš and Mario Ćorić and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Kennedy S, Bergqvist A, Chapron C, D’Hooghe T, Dunselman G, Greb R, Saridogan E (2005) ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. Hum Reprod 20(10):2698–2704. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei135
Schliep KC, Mumford SL, Peterson CM, Chen Z, Johnstone EB, Sharp HT, Buck Louis GM (2015) Pain typology and incident endometriosis. Hum Reprod 30(10):2427–2438. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev147
Shafrir AL, Farland LV, Shah DK, Harris HR, Kvaskoff M, Zondervan K, Missmer SA (2018) Risk for and consequences of endometriosis: A critical epidemiologic review. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynecol 51:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.06.001
Seear K (2009) The etiquette of endometriosis: Stigmatisation, menstrual concealment and the diagnostic delay. Soc Sci Med 69(8):1220–1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.07.023
De Graaff AA, D’Hooghe TM, Dunselman GAJ, Dirksen CD, Hummelshoj L, WERF EndoCost Consortium, …, Wullschleger M (2013) The significant effect of endometriosis on physical, mental and social wellbeing: results from an international cross-sectional survey. Hum Reprod 28(10):2677–2685. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det284
Fourquet J, Báez L, Figueroa M, Iriarte RI, Flores I (2011) Quantification of the impact of endometriosis symptoms on health-related quality of life and work productivity. Fertil Steril 96(1):107–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.04.095
Bourdel N, Chauvet P, Billone V, Douridas G, Fauconnier A, Gerbaud L, Canis M (2019) Systematic review of quality of life measures in patients with endometriosis. PLoS ONE 14(1):e0208464. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208464
Jones G (2001) Development of an endometriosis quality-of-life instrument: The Endometriosis Health Profile-30. Obstet Gynecol 98(2):258–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(01)01433-8
Rizwana R, Ashraf K (2018) The construction and validation of the Stellenbosch Endometriosis Quality of life measure (SEQOL). Health Care Women Int 39(10):1123–1139. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2018.1455684
Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S (2004) Development of the Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire: The EHP-5. Qual Life Res 13(3):695–704. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:QURE.0000021321.48041.0e
Selcuk S, Sahin S, Demirci O, Aksoy B, Eroglu M, Ay P, Cam C (2015) Translation and validation of the Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-5) in patients with laparoscopically diagnosed endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biology 185:41–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.11.039
Minas V, Dada T (2014) Laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis and effects on quality of life: A retrospective study using the short form EHP-5 endometriosis specific questionnaire. J Obstet Gynaecol 34(4):336–340. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2013.874409
Aubry G, Panel P, Thiollier G, Huchon C, Fauconnier A (2017) Measuring health-related quality of life in women with endometriosis: comparing the clinimetric properties of the Endometriosis Health Profile-5 (EHP-5) and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). Hum Reprod 32(6):1258–1269. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex057
Goshtasebi A, Nematollahzadeh M, Hariri FZ, Montazeri A (2011) The short form endometriosis health profile (EHP-5): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. J Ovarian Res 4(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-2215-4-11
Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH (1995) The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav Res Ther 33(3):335–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U
González-Rivera JA, Pagán-Torres OM, Pérez-Torres EM (2020) Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct Validity Problem in Hispanics. Eur J Invest Health Psychol Educ 10(1):375–389. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe10010028
Toth M, Jokić-Begić N (2020) Psychological contribution to understanding the nature of dry eye disease: a cross-sectional study of anxiety sensitivity and dry eyes. Health Psychol Behav Med 8(1):202–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2020.1770093
Takaesu Y, Nishi H, Kojima J, Sasaki T, Nagamitsu Y, Kato R, Isaka K (2016) Dienogest compared with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist after conservative surgery for endometriosis: Comparison between dienogest and GnRHa. J Obstet Gynecol Res 42(9):1152–1158. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13023
Cozzolino M, Coccia M, Lazzeri G, Basile F, Troiano G (2019) Variables Associated with Endometriosis-related Pain: A Pilot Study using a Visual Analogue Scale. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia / RBGO Gynecology and Obstetrics 41(03):170–175. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1679879
Fauconnier A, Huchon C, Chaillou L, Aubry G, Renouvel F, Panel P (2017) Development of a French version of the Endometriosis Health Profile 5 (EHP-5): cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation. Qual Life Res 26(1):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1346-y
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Riphagen I, de Vet HCW (2009) Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments. Qual Life Res 18(3):313–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9451-9
Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS (2017) Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J Anaesth 11(Suppl 1):S80–S89. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17

Appendix.docx

Download PDF

Reviewers agreed at journal
07 Jun, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
01 Jun, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
11 May, 2022
First submitted to journal
05 May, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

The Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire (EHP-5): psychometric validity assessment of a Croatian version

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Participants and study design

Questionnaires

Translation and culture adaptation

Statistical analysis

Results

Sample characteristics

Reliability

Construct validity

Concurrent validity

Discussion

Declarations

References

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1