Development and Validation of a Turkish Version of Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10

Betül Kozanhan, Munise Yıldız, Ayşenur Polat, Oğuzhan Günenç, Sami Mahmut Tutar, Mehmet Sinan İyisoy, Nur Gözde Kulhan, Pervez Sultan, Betül Kozanhan, Munise Yıldız, Ayşenur Polat, Oğuzhan Günenç, Sami Mahmut Tutar, Mehmet Sinan İyisoy, Nur Gözde Kulhan, Pervez Sultan

Abstract

Objective: The 10-item Obstetric Quality-of-Recovery 10 scale is a validated patient-reported outcome questionnaire that measures the quality of recovery following delivery. This study aims to develop a Turkish version of the Obstetric Quality of Recovery 10 to evaluate its validity, reliability, and clinical feasibility.

Methods: Term parturients who underwent vaginal delivery or elective caesarean delivery were asked to complete a Turkish version of Obstetric Quality-of-Recovery 10 scoring tool and EuroQol 5-dimension 3L scores (including a global health visual analogue scale) 24 hours after delivery. To validate the Obstetric Quality of Recovery 10-Turkish, we assessed validity, reliability, and clinical feasibility and compared it with the EQ-5D-3L questionnaires.

Results: One hundred parturients completed the questionnaire in 24 hours (100% response rate). Obstetric Quality of Recovery 10-Turkish correlated highly with EQ-5D-3L score (r=-0.611) and global health visual analogue scale score (r = 0.652) at 24 hours and discriminated well between good versus poor recovery (global health visual analogue scale score ≥70 vs <70; median interquartile range were 86 [80-90] and 68 [59-75] (P < .001), respectively). Scores were similar for caesarean and vaginal deliveries, 83 (76-89) and 82.5 (69-90), respectively (P = .5). Twenty-four-hour Obstetric Quality of Recovery 10-Turkish scores did not correlate with any baseline demographic and clinical data parameters. Internal consistency was good (Cronbach's alpha=0.87 and inter-item correlation=0.41), and split-half reliability was very good (Spearman-Brown prophesy reliability estimate=0.86). Test-retest reliability was excellent (intra-class correlation coefficient=0.99). No floor or ceiling effects were demonstrated.

Conclusion: The Obstetric Quality of Recovery 10-Turkish is a valid, reliable, and clinically feasible measure of inpatient postpartum recovery following caesarean and vaginal delivery modes.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart of patient recruitment.

References

    1. World Health Organization. WHO Recommendations: Intrapartum Care for a Positive Childbirth Experience; 2018. Available at: . Accessed November 28, 2021.
    1. Sultan P, Sadana N, Sharawi al. Evaluation of domains of patient reported outcome measures for recovery after childbirth: a scoping and systematic review. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(5):e205540. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.5540)
    1. Sultan P, Carvalho B. Postpartum recovery: what does it take to get back to a baseline? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2021;33(2):86 93. 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000684)
    1. Sharawi N, Klima L, Shah R, Blake L, Carvalho B, Sultan P. Evaluation of patient-reported outcome measures of functional recovery following caesarean section: a systematic review using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Anaesthesia. 2019;74(11):1439 1455. 10.1111/anae.14807)
    1. Ciechanowicz S, Setty T, Robson al. Development and evaluation of an obstetric quality-of-recovery score (ObsQoR-11) after elective Caesarean delivery. Br J Anaesth. 2019;122(1):69 78. 10.1016/j.bja.2018.06.011)
    1. Ciechanowicz S, Howle R, Heppolette C, Nakhjavani B, Carvalho B, Sultan P. Evaluation of the Obstetric Quality-of-Recovery score (ObsQoR-11) following non-elective caesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019;39:51 59. 10.1016/j.ijoa.2019.01.010)
    1. Sultan P, Kormendy F, Nishimura S, Carvalho B, Guo N, Papageorgiou C. Comparison of spontaneous versus operative vaginal delivery using Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10): an observational cohort study. J Clin Anesth. 2020;63:109781. 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109781)
    1. Sultan P, Kamath N, Carvalho al. Evaluation of inpatient postpartum recovery using the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 patient-reported outcome measure: a single-center observational study. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020;2(4):100202. 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100202)
    1. Shalev S, Orbach-Zinger S, Sultan al. Obstetric quality of recovery scoring tool: assessment of validity, reliability and feasibility in an Israeli cesarean delivery population. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2020;44:51. 10.1016/j.ijoa.2020.07.009)
    1. EuroQoL. EuroQol launches a new whiteboard animation. Translating Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Use around the World: the Example of EQ-5D. Available at: ; Accessed Nov 28, 2021.
    1. Kaya N, Babadağ K. Romatoid Artritli Bireylerde Sağlığa İlişkin Yaşam Kalitesi. Florence Nightingale J Nurs. 2004;13(53):51 72.
    1. Szende A, Janssen B, Cabases J. Self-Reported Population Health: an International Perspective based on EQ-5D [internet]; 2014. Dordrecht (NLE): Springer.
    1. Devlin NJ, Brooks R. EQ-5D and the EuroQol Group: past, present and future. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15(2):127 137. 10.1007/s40258-017-0310-5)
    1. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(6):e005671. 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671)
    1. Wilson RD, Caughey AB, Wood al. Guidelines for antenatal and preoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 1). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(6):523.e1 523.e15. 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.09.015)
    1. Caughey AB, Wood SL, Macones al. Guidelines for intraoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 2). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(6):533 544. 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.08.006)
    1. Macones GA, Caughey AB, Wood al. Guidelines for postoperative care in cesarean delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations (part 3). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(3):247.e1 247.e9. 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.04.012)
    1. Bollag L, Lim G, Sultan al. Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology: consensus statement and recommendations for enhanced recovery after cesarean. Anesth Analg. 2021;132(5):1362 1377. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005257)
    1. Sultan P, Sharawi N, Blake L, Carvalho B. Enhanced recovery after caesarean delivery versus standard care studies: a systematic review of interventions and outcomes. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2020;43:72 86. 10.1016/j.ijoa.2020.03.003)
    1. Sultan P, Sharawi N, Blake L, Habib AS, Brookfield KF, Carvalho B. Impact of enhanced recovery after caesarean delivery on maternal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2021;40(5):100935. 10.1016/j.accpm.2021.100935)
    1. Sultan P, Jensen SE, Taylor al. Proposed domains for assessing postpartum recovery: a concept elicitation study. BJOG. 2022;129(1):9 20. 10.1111/1471-0528.16937)
    1. Sultan P, Sharawi N, Blake al. Use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess outpatient postpartum recovery: a systematic review. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(5):e2111600. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.11600)
    1. Sultan P, Ando K, Sultan al. A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess postpartum pain using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Br J Anaesth. 2021;127(2):264 274. 10.1016/j.bja.2021.03.035)
    1. Sultan P, Ando K, Sultan al. A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess sleep in ­postpartum women using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Sleep. 2021;44(10):44(10):zsab128. 10.1093/sleep/zsab128)
    1. Mokkink LB, Prinsen C, Patrick al. COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome ­measures (PROMs). User Manual . 2018;78(1):1.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir