Background: Quality of life (QoL) in persons with spinal cord
injury (SCI) has been found to differ across countries. However,
comparability of measurement results between countries depends on
the cross-cultural validity of the applied instruments. The study
examined the metric quality and cross-cultural validity of the
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the Life Satisfaction
Questionnaire (LISAT-9), the Personal Well-Being Index (PWI) and
the 5-item World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment
(WHOQoL-5) across six countries in a sample of persons with spinal
cord injury (SCI). Methods: A cross-sectional multi-centre study
was conducted and the data of 243 out-patients with SCI from study
centers in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, South Africa, and the
United States were analyzed using Raschbased methods. Results: The
analyses showed high reliability for all 4 instruments (person
reliability index .78-.92). Unidimensionality of measurement was
supported for the WHOQoL-5 (Chi(2) = 16.43, df = 10, p =.088),
partially supported for the PWI (Chi(2) = 15.62, df = 16, p =
.480), but rejected for the LISAT-9 (Chi(2) = 50.60, df = 18, p =
.000) and the SWLS (Chi2 = 78.54, df = 10, p =.000) based on
overall and item-wise Chi(2) tests, principal components analyses
and independent t-tests. The response scales showed the expected
ordering for the WHOQoL-5 and the PWI, but not for the other two
instruments. Using differential item functioning (DIF) analyses
potential cross-country bias was found in two items of the SWLS and
the WHOQoL-5, three items of the LISAT-9 and four items of the PWI.
However, applying Rasch-based statistical methods, especially
subtest analyses, it was possible to identify optimal strategies to
enhance the metric properties and the cross-country equivalence of
the instruments post-hoc. Following the post-hoc procedures the
WHOQOL-5 and the PWI worked in a consistent and expected way in all
countries. Conclusions: QoL assessment using the summary scores of
the WHOQOL-5 and the PWI appeared cross-culturally valid in persons
with SCI. In contrast, summary scores of the LISAT-9 and the SWLS
have to be interpreted with caution. The findings of the current
study can be especially helpful to select instruments for
international research projects in SCI.
Kommentare (0)
Melde dich an, um einen Kommentar zu schreiben.