We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Validation Studies
Validation of overactive bladder questionnaire (1-week recall version) in medically complex elderly patients with overactive bladder.
International Urogynecology Journal 2017 December
INTRODUCTION: The 33-item Overactive Bladder questionnaire (OAB-q; 1-week recall version) has been psychometrically validated in middle-aged, generally healthy patients with overactive bladder. The present analysis was conducted to determine the psychometric validity of the OAB-q in medically complex elderly patients.
METHODS: OAB-q structure was evaluated using a second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model with five domains and one aggregated domain, using pooled data from two clinical trials (786 observations) for urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). Psychometric validity was evaluated with CFA, Cronbach coefficient α (CCA) for reliability, Spearman correlations for convergent validity, differences in OAB-q scores in relation to UUI severity and Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) scores for known-groups validity, and effect size (ES) of differences in mean scores of OAB-q domains over time for treatment responsiveness.
RESULTS: Participants were predominantly female (82.2%) and white (85.9%); mean age was 75.0 years. The second-order CFA was confirmed with a Bentler's comparative fit index of 0.90, t values for path coefficients of >1.96, and standardized path coefficients of >0.40. OAB-q domains demonstrated good internal consistency (CCA >0.7). Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations (0.4-0.7) between OAB-q domain and PPBC scores. Significant differences in OAB-q domain scores between groups with different symptom severity established known-groups validity. Significant changes in mean OAB-q scores from baseline to week 12 with moderate-to-large ES (0.50-0.80) demonstrated treatment responsiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: The OAB-q demonstrates reliability, concurrent and discriminant validity, and responsiveness to treatment. The evidence shows that the OAB-q is psychometrically sound for use in medically complex elderly patients with overactive bladder.
METHODS: OAB-q structure was evaluated using a second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model with five domains and one aggregated domain, using pooled data from two clinical trials (786 observations) for urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). Psychometric validity was evaluated with CFA, Cronbach coefficient α (CCA) for reliability, Spearman correlations for convergent validity, differences in OAB-q scores in relation to UUI severity and Patient Perception of Bladder Condition (PPBC) scores for known-groups validity, and effect size (ES) of differences in mean scores of OAB-q domains over time for treatment responsiveness.
RESULTS: Participants were predominantly female (82.2%) and white (85.9%); mean age was 75.0 years. The second-order CFA was confirmed with a Bentler's comparative fit index of 0.90, t values for path coefficients of >1.96, and standardized path coefficients of >0.40. OAB-q domains demonstrated good internal consistency (CCA >0.7). Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations (0.4-0.7) between OAB-q domain and PPBC scores. Significant differences in OAB-q domain scores between groups with different symptom severity established known-groups validity. Significant changes in mean OAB-q scores from baseline to week 12 with moderate-to-large ES (0.50-0.80) demonstrated treatment responsiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: The OAB-q demonstrates reliability, concurrent and discriminant validity, and responsiveness to treatment. The evidence shows that the OAB-q is psychometrically sound for use in medically complex elderly patients with overactive bladder.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app