Quality of life and aphasia. Multicentric standardization of a questionnaire.

AIM: It is important to assess aphasics' quality of life in order to plan a rehabilitation treatment. To date such a tool is still missing for Italian patients. This paper reports normative data of the Italian version of SAQOL-39, a British questionnaire aimed to assess aphasics' quality of life. It consists of 39 items, divided into 4 subdomains (Physical, Communication, Psychosocial and Energy). METHODS: Forty-two patients coming from 3 different Speech Therapy Services were enrolled. All patients completed speech therapy before examination. They were submitted to the Italian SAQOL-39 and 2 screening tests for aphasia: 1) Communication Assessment Scale according Goodglass and Kaplan; 2) Franchay Aphasia Screening Test (FAST). A receptive FAST score of 7 out of 15 was used as a cut-off score for SAQOL-39 administration. RESULTS: The Italian SAQOL-39 showed good internal consistency (full scale Cronbach's alpha 0.939). Cronbach's alpha for every subdomains ranged from 0.950 (Communication) to 0.720 (Energy). Fluent aphasics gave significantly higher scores than nonfluent ones on full scale, and all out of Energy subdomains. Furthermore gravity of aphasia correlated with both full scale and Communication subdomain scores. CONCLUSIONS: In authors' opinion, the Italian SAQOL-39 shares many psychometric features with the English one. This questionnaire seems to be suitable for clinical practice.

Aphasia quality of life: reliability of the Italian version of SAQOL-39.

AIM: In recent times there has been an increasing interest in assessing the quality of life (QOL) in stroke clinical trials. To our knowledge, an Italian tool suitable for this purpose is still missing. So we adapted to Italian language the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39), that is a British questionnaire recently validated with aphasic subjects. The aim of this paper is to validate our version of SAQOL-39. METHODS: To determine the matching of our version, we requested a native English speaker to translate the Italian version into English. Twelve patients (7 male, 5 female; mean age 66.4 years) were submitted to our test. All subjects were interviewed twice by 2 raters, at 24 h of distance. Neither examinator knew results of the other interview. Statistical analysis was performed by determining Cronbach's a and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Comparing the original SAQOL-39 to the English translation of our Italian version, we found only a low percentage (10%) of minimal semantic variations. As for test-retest reliability, ICC for global score was 0.898 (ICC(2,39)). ICC range for SAQOL-39 subdomains was 0.816 to 0.969. Cronbach's a for full scale scores was 0.916 (subdomains ranged 0.767 to 0.976). Results seem good as for usefulness, reliability and acceptability of the Italian version of SAQOL-39, like the original version of this test. CONCLUSIONS: Our Italian version of SAQOL-39 seems suitable for clinical use. A multicentric study aiming to compare our data to original English ones is in progress.