Paper versus web-based administration of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7

Victoria L. Handa, Matthew D. Barber, Stephen B. Young, Michael P. Aronson, Abraham Morse, Geoffrey W. Cundiff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Web-based questionnaires are increasingly employed for clinical research. To investigate whether web-based and paper versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7 (PFIQ-7) yield similar results, we compared results obtained with these two modes of administration. Women with pelvic floor disorders completed both versions of these questionnaires. Scores between modes of administration were compared using the paired t test and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Among the 52 participants, there were no significant differences in scores or scale scores between the web-based and paper questionnaires. The ICC was 0.91 for the PFDI-20 score and 0.81 for the PFIQ-7 score (p < 0.001 for each). The web-based format was preferred by 22 participants (53%), ten (24%) preferred the paper format, and nine (21%) had no preference. The acceptability and score equivalence recommend these web-based questionnaires as an alternative to paper questionnaires for clinical research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1331-1335
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Urogynecology Journal
Volume19
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - 2008

Keywords

  • Electronic questionnaire
  • Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory
  • Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire
  • Quality of life

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Urology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Paper versus web-based administration of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this