Validation of the Thai version of the obstetric quality of recovery score (obsqor-10-Thai) after elective cesarean delivery

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

The Obstetric Quality of Recovery score (ObsQoR-10) is a questionnaire used to assess recovery after cesarean delivery. However, the original ObsQoR-10 is in English and was mainly validated in the Western population. We therefore evaluated the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the ObsQoR-10-Thai in patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery.

Methods

The original ObsQoR-10 was translated into Thai, and psychometric validation was performed to evaluate the quality of post-cesarean recovery. The ObsQoR-10-Thai, activities of daily living checklist, and 100-mm visual analog scale of global health (VAS-GH) questionnaires were administered to the study participants before and 24 and 48-h postpartum. Validity, reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility of the ObsQoR-10-Thai were assessed.

Results

We included 110 patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery. The mean ObsQoR-10-Thai score at baseline and 24 and 48-h postpartum was 83.35 ± 11.15, 56.75 ± 11.6, and 70.96 ± 13.65, respectively. The ObsQoR-10-Thai score differed significantly between the two groups divided based on the VAS-GH (≥ 70 vs. < 70): 75.58 ± 13.81 and 52.56 ± 10.61, respectively ( P < 0.001). The convergent validity between the ObsQoR-10-Thai and VAS-GH was good ( r = 0.60, P < 0.001). The ObsQoR-10-Thai displayed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87), split-half reliability (0.92), and test–retest reliability (0.99, 95% CI: 0.98–0.99). The median time to complete the questionnaire was 2 (IQR, 1–6) min.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that the ObsQoR-10-Thai is valid and has good reliability, with a high degree of responsiveness in terms of assessment of recovery after elective cesarean delivery.

Trial registration

This study was registered on the Thai Clinical Trials Registry, identifier TCTR20210204001, registered on 04/02/2021 (Prospectively registration).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-023-02010-6.

Related collections

Most cited references 21

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

Erik von Elm, Douglas G. Altman, Matthias Egger … (2014)

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the Web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

0 comments Cited 2611 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures

Dorcas E. Beaton, Claire Bombardier, Marcos Ferraz … (2001)

0 comments Cited 1743 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Development and psychometric evaluation of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-15.

Tricia A. Burke, Daniel Stark, Paul S Myles (2013)

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. 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. 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 (ri = 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. The QoR-15 provides a valid, extensive, and yet efficient evaluation of postoperative QoR.

0 comments Cited 217 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Sasima Dusitkasem: sasima1308@gmail.com

Jinda Jindapitak: jindajindapitak@gmail.com

Vanlapa Arnuntasupakul: vanlapaa@gmail.com

Varinee Lekprasert: varinee.lek@mahidol.ac.th

Sommart Bumrungphuet: sommart.bum@mahidol.ac.th

Chakrit Sukying: chakrit.suk@mahidol.ac.th

Rojnarin Komonhirun: childhood1@hotmail.com

Lisa Sangkum: lisa.sangkum@gmail.com

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Anesthesiol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Anesthesiol

Title: BMC Anesthesiology

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2253

Publication date (Electronic): 7 March 2023

Publication date PMC-release: 7 March 2023

Publication date Collection: 2023

Volume: 23

Electronic Location Identifier: 72

Affiliations

[1 ]GRID grid.10223.32, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0490, 270 Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, , Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, ; Rama VI Road, Phayathai, Ratchatewi, Bangkok, 10400 Thailand

[2 ]GRID grid.10223.32, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0490, 270 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecologics, Faculty of Medicine, , Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, ; Rama VI Road, Phayathai, Ratchatewi, Bangkok, 10400 Thailand

[3 ]GRID grid.10223.32, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0490, 270 Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, , Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, ; Rama VI Road, Phayathai, Ratchatewi, Bangkok, 10400 Thailand

Article

Publisher ID: 2010

DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02010-6

PMC ID: 9990285

PubMed ID: 36882676

SO-VID: 69cfb54b-fb69-497f-9266-7f16643c89ad

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.