Why women do not ask for information on preconception health? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Preconception care involves health promotion to reduce risk factors that might affect women and couples of childbearing age. The risk factors of adverse reproductive outcomes include recognized genetic diseases in the family or the individual, previous congenital diseases, miscarriage, prematurity, fetal growth restriction, infertility, chronic maternal diseases, lifestyle, and occupational or environmental factors. Effective preconception care involves a range of preventive, therapeutic and behavioural interventions. Although in Italy there are national preconception care recommendations concerning the general population, they are usually encouraged informally and only for single risk factors. At present there is increasing interest in offering a global intervention in this field. The aim of this study was to investigate attitudes and behaviours of Italian women of childbearing age and healthcare professionals regarding preconception health. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study among women of childbearing age and healthcare professionals between February 2014 and February 2015. Five focus groups were held: 2 with non-pregnant women aged 22 to 44 years and 3 with healthcare professionals. Discussion topics included women's questions about preconception health, worries and barriers regarding preconception care interventions, attitudes and behaviours of women and healthcare professionals towards preconception health, women's information sources. In the analysis of the focus groups priority was given to what was said by the women, supplemented by information from the healthcare professionals' focus groups. RESULTS: Fourteen women of childbearing age (8 nulliparae and 6 multiparae) and 12 healthcare professionals (3 nurses, 4 midwives, 5 doctors) participated in the focus groups. The results indicate the presence of many barriers and a lack of awareness of preconception health relating to women, healthcare professionals and policies. Women's knowledge and attitudes towards primary preconception care information are described. The main reference source of information in this field for Italian women seems to be their obstetric-gynaecologist. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates that several barriers influence preconception care in Italy. Moreover, a lack of awareness of preconception health and care among Italian women of childbearing age and healthcare professionals emerges. The findings might contribute to strategies for the implementation of preconception care guidelines.

International development of the patient-reported outcome indices for multiple sclerosis (PRIMUS).

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Indices for Multiple Sclerosis (PRIMUS) comprises a suite of three scales for assessing symptoms, activity limitations, and quality of life in multiple sclerosis (MS). It was developed in the UK and has been shown to have excellent psychometric properties. This study describes the adaptation of eight language versions for Canadian English, Canadian French, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, and US English. METHODS: The PRIMUS was translated using the dual-panel process. Cognitive debriefing interviews conducted with MS patients assessed face and content validity. Psychometric and scaling properties were assessed via a two-administration postal survey conducted in each country involving the PRIMUS, the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), the Unidimensional Fatigue Impact Scale (U-FIS), and demographic questions. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefing interviews demonstrated the acceptability of the new language versions. Analysis of survey data showed that the new language versions of the three PRIMUS scales were unidimensional (as indicated by fit to the Rasch model) and that they had good internal consistency and reproducibility. PRIMUS scale scores correlated as expected with those on the NHP and the U-FIS. The scales in all countries were able to discriminate between groups of patients on the basis of their self-reported MS severity, general health, and employment status. CONCLUSIONS: The PRIMUS was successfully adapted into eight new languages. Most of the tests showed the PRIMUS to have good unidimensionality and to have good internal consistency, reproducibility, and construct validity. The measure is now available for use in clinical studies and trials involving these countries and the UK. Further work is required to assess the measure's responsiveness.

International development of the Unidimensional Fatigue Impact Scale (U-FIS).

OBJECTIVE: The 22-item Unidimensional Fatigue Impact Scale (U-FIS) provides an index of the impact of fatigue on patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). The objective is to produce eight new language versions of the U-FIS: Canadian-English, Canadian-French, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, and US-English. METHODS: The U-FIS was translated via two translation panels. Cognitive debriefing interviews conducted with patients in each country assessed face and content validity. Scaling and psychometric properties were assessed via survey data with patients in each country completing the U-FIS, Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), and demographic questions. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefing interviews demonstrated U-FIS acceptability. Analysis of postal survey data showed all new language versions to be unidimensional. Reliability was high, with test-retest correlations and internal-consistency coefficients exceeding 0.85. Initial evidence of validity was provided by moderate to high correlations with NHP scales. The U-FIS was able to discriminate between groups based on employment status, perceived MS severity, and general health. CONCLUSION: The U-FIS is a practical new measure of the impact of fatigue. It was successfully adapted into eight new languages to broaden availability for researchers. Psychometric analyses indicated that the new language versions were unidimensional and reproducible with promising construct validity.

Electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor: Italian cultural adaptation and face validity.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic questionnaires offer invaluable advantages over paper-based ones. The aims of this study were to make available to Italian clinicians a culturally adapted version of the multidimensional electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor and to test face validity and factorial analysis for the Urinary section. METHODS: The original English-language version of electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor was cross-culturally adapted to the Italian language. At the Urogynaecology Unit of Buzzi Hospital in Milan, the Urinary section of the Italian version was completed by women symptomatic for pelvic floor dysfunction. Time to questionnaire completion was recorded, and a nine-item paper questionnaire about the questionnaire was completed. Descriptive analysis to define patient population characteristics and nine-item paper questionnaire analysis were performed. Factorial analyses on the Urinary section of the questionnaire and on the nine-item paper questionnaire were performed, and internal reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: A culturally adapted Italian version of electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor was provided. In total, 95 women complaining of pelvic floor dysfunction took part in the study. Mean time to electronic questionnaire completion was 9 min (range: 5-17), with 95% of patients completing within 15 min. More than 95% of women considered the Italian version of electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor helpful, relevant, easy to use and comprehensive and would be happy to use it again. The questionnaire being overly long was an issue for 17% of women. The internal consistency of items in the nine-item paper questionnaire was confirmed with Cronbach's alpha scores > 0.8 for both the 'Value' and 'Burden' domains. DISCUSSION: Our Italian cultural adaptation of electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic Floor was well accepted by an appropriate target population. A full psychometric validation is now warranted.

The living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease scale was successfully adapted for use in Southern European (Italian and Spanish) and Eastern European (Russian) cultures.

OBJECTIVE: The living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (LCOPD) scale was developed in the United Kingdom and the United States to assess the quality of life (QoL) of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The scale was shown to be well accepted by patients, to be unidimensional, and to have very good psychometric properties. This article reports on the adaptation of the measure for use in representative Southern European (Italian and Spanish) and Eastern European (Russian) languages. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The same methodology was used in each country: translation panels were held to produce new language versions. These were then tested with patients to ensure face and content validity. Finally, test-retest postal surveys were conducted to establish internal consistency, reproducibility, and construct validity. RESULTS: Few problems were found in translating the LCOPD, and patient interviews indicated that the measure was considered relevant and easy to complete. The validation surveys showed that the new versions of the LCOPD were consistent, reproducible, and had good construct validity. The psychometric properties of the new versions were similar to those found for the original U.K. and U.S. versions. CONCLUSION: The study was successful in adapting the LCOPD for use in Southern and Eastern European languages.

Experts' opinions on the role of liver biopsy in HCV infection: a Delphi survey by the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists (A.I.G.O.).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Liver biopsy represents the gold standard to establish a diagnosis in all liver patients, but its current position in chronic viral hepatitis is questioned. We aimed to create a consensus on best practice of use of liver biopsy in the management of chronic HCV infection. METHODS: We applied the Delphi method to 12 clinical scenarios of chronic HCV infection, to assess the extent of agreement (consensus measurement) and to resolve disagreement (consensus development) on the appropriateness of liver biopsy. RESULTS: Among 108 chosen hepatologists, 61 (56.5%) accepted to participate to the first-round survey. In four patients the majority of experts (from 61.4 to 86.2%) agreed not to perform liver biopsy; in two cases an equivalent opinion was found, and in the remaining six scenarios the majority of experts would have recommended a biopsy. No expert recommended liver biopsy in all cases, while most agreed for an histological evaluation of 4 to 8 cases. At the second round, 36 experts (59%) submitted ballots. Fifty-four out of 431 (12.6%) original judgments were changed with equal distribution among different scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey showed a great divergence of management of similar patients and should provide a stimulus for an evidence-based evaluation of liver histology in chronic HCV infection.