Reliability and Validity of the Mandarin Version of the Voice-Related Quality of Life (MV-RQOL) Measure

  • Yi-Ai Huang
    Affiliations
    Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Wan Fan Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Tse-An Hsu
    Affiliations
    Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland
    Search for articles by this author
  • Sherry Fu
    Correspondence
    Address correspondence and reprint Sherry Fu, Department of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Mackay Medical College, 800 Zhongshan North Road, Section 6, Shilin district, Taipei, Taiwan. 11152
    Affiliations
    Department of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Mackay Medical College, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Taipei American School, Divison of Lower School, Taipei, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Li-Mei Wang
    Affiliations
    Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
Published:November 27, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.10.010

      Abstract

      Objectives

      The reliability and validity of the Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL) measure has been conducted in languages other than Mandarin. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the reliability and validity of the Mandarin version of the V-RQOL (MV-RQOL) questionnaire.

      Methods

      The MV-RQOL was completed by a total of 57 participants, including 27 individuals with voice disorders (VD) and 30 individuals without voice disorders (NVD). Statistical analyses were carried out to evaluate the validity, reliability, reproducibility, and the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was also derived.

      Results

      Statistical analyses demonstrated the MV-RQOL has strong internal consistency. The test-retest reliability was found to be high as well. There was a significant difference between the groups with and without voice disorders. The NVD group had higher scores compared with the VD group for the overall MV-RQOL score and for the 2 domains. In addition, the scores between males and females showed no significant differences. A significant difference was found between the MV-RQOL scores of individuals who defined their voices as good and very good, and those who defined their voices as poor and fair. Area under the curve value from ROC curve was found to be 0.994. The optimal cutoff value was found to be 85.00, with sensitivity of 96.7% and specificity of 96.3%.

      Conclusions

      Based on the results, it can be suggested that the MV-RQOL measure is a reliable and valid self-assessment tool, that discriminates well between patients with and without voice disorders, in the Taiwanese population.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Voice
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

        • Colton R
        • Casper JK
        Understanding voice problems.
        2nd ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore1996
        • Lee L
        • Stemple JC
        • Glaze L
        • et al.
        Quick screen for voice and supplementary documents for identifying pediatric voice disorders.
        Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2004; 35: 308-319https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2004/030
        • Stemple JC
        • Glaze LE
        • Klaben BG
        Clinical voice pathology: Theory and management.
        Singular, San Diego, CA2000
        • Behlau M
        • Madazio G
        • Oliveira G
        Functional dysphonia: strategies to improve patient outcomes.
        Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2015; 6: 243-253https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S68631
        • Roy N
        • Barkmeier-Kraemer J
        • Eadie T
        • et al.
        Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: a systematic review.
        Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2013; 22: 212-226https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0014
        • Alkhafaji MR
        • Emam D
        Physiology of the voice and clinical voice assessment.
        in: Al-Qahtani A Haidar H Larem A. Textbook of Clinical Otolaryngology. Springer, Cham, Switzerland2021: 515-520
        • Aaby C
        • Heimdal JH
        The voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL) measure – a study on validity and reliability of the Norwegian version.
        J Voice. 2013; 27: 258https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2012.10.007
        • Romak JJ
        • Orbelo DM
        • Maragos NE
        • et al.
        Correlation of the voice handicap index-10 (VHI-10) and voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL) in patients with dysphonia.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 237-240https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.07.015
        • Hogikyan ND
        • Sethuraman G
        Validation of an instrument to measure voice-related quality of life (VRQOL).
        J Voice. 1999; 13: 557-569https://doi.org/10.1016/S0892-1997(99)80010-1
        • Tezcaner ZÇ
        • Aksoy S
        Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the voice-related quality of life measure.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 262https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.04.012
        • Jacobson BH
        • Johnson A
        • Grywalski C
        • et al.
        The voice handicap index (VHI): development and validation.
        Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 1997; 6: 66-70https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360.0603.66
        • Epstein R
        • Hirani SP
        • Stygall J
        • et al.
        How do individuals cope with voice disorders? introducing the voice disability coping questionnaire.
        J Voice. 2009; 23: 209-217https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.09.001
        • Ma EP
        • Yiu EM
        Voice activity and participation profile.
        J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001; 44: 511-524https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2001/040
        • Rangarajan A
        • Selvaraj JL
        • Santhanam DP
        The voice-related quality of life: a study on the reliability and validity of the Tamil version.
        Clin Med Insights Ear Nose Throat. 2019; 121179550619831049https://doi.org/10.1177/1179550619831049
        • Rosen CA
        • Lee AS
        • Osborne J
        • et al.
        Development and validation of the voice handicap index-10.
        Laryngoscope. 2004; 114: 1549-1556https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200409000-00009
        • Amir O
        • Tavor Y
        • Leibovitzh T
        • et al.
        Evaluating the validity of the voice handicap index-10 (VHI-10) among Hebrew speakers.
        Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006; 135: 603-607https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2006.06.1252
        • Helidoni ME
        • Murry T
        • Moschandreas J
        • et al.
        Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the voice handicap index into greek.
        J Voice. 2010; 24: 221-227https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.06.005
        • Trinite B
        • Sokolovs J
        Adaptation and validation of the voice handicap index in latvian.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 452-457https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.01.008
        • Seifpanahi S
        • Jalaie S
        • Nikoo MR
        • et al.
        Translated versions of voice handicap index (VHI)-30 across languages: a systematic review.
        Iran J Public Health. 2015; 44: 458-469
        • Bourque JM
        • Defoy L
        • Batcho CS
        • et al.
        Cross-Cultural adaptation and validation of the voice handicap index in the quebec french population (VHI-QF).
        J Voice. 2020; 34: 811https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.04.010
        • Maksimovic J
        • Vukasinovic M
        • Vlajinac H
        • et al.
        Transcultural adaptation and validation of the voice handicap index-10 into the serbian language.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2020; 72: 242-248https://doi.org/10.1159/000499927
        • Wang NM
        • Huang KY
        • Su MC
        • et al.
        Development and validation of the voice handicap index-10 in mandarin chinese.
        J Taiwan Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011; 46: 190-196https://doi.org/10.6286/2011.46.4.190
        • Kupfer RA
        • Hogikyan EM
        • Hogikyan ND
        Establishment of a normative database for the voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL) measure.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 449-451https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.11.003
        • Gasparini G
        • Behlau M
        Quality of life: validation of the Brazilian version of the voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL) measure.
        J Voice. 2009; 23: 76-81https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.04.005
        • Sielska-Badurek E
        • Rzepakowska A
        • Sobol M
        • et al.
        Adaptation and validation of the voice-related quality of life measure into Polish.
        J Voice. 2016; 30: 773-7e7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.11.014
        • Schwanfelder C
        • Eysholdt U
        • Rosanowski F
        • et al.
        Voice-related quality of life: structure, validity and factors of the German questionnaire.
        Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2008; 60: 241-248https://doi.org/10.1159/000151583
        • Wulff NB
        • Møller PR
        • Christensen KB
        • et al.
        The voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL) instrument: cross-cultural translation and test of validity and reliability of the Danish version.
        J Voice. 2020; 35 (e7-806.e14): 806https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.01.010
      1. Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. World Health Organization 2009. Available at: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/. Accessed February 6, 2017.

        • Guillemin F
        • Bombardier C
        • Beaton D
        Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1993; 46: 1417-1432https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N
        • Gjersing L
        • Caplehorn JR
        • Clausen T
        Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010; 10: 13https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-13
        • Hee OC
        Validity and reliability of the customer-oriented behaviour scale in the health tourism hospitals in Malaysia.
        Int J Caring Sci. 2014; 7: 771-775
        • Koo TK
        • Li MY
        A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research.
        J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15: 155-163https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
        • Mandrekar JN
        Receiver operating characteristic curve in diagnostic test assessment.
        J Thorac Oncol. 2010; 5: 1315-1316https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec173d
        • Akobeng AK
        Understanding diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic curves.
        Acta Paediatr. 2007; 96: 644-647https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2006.00178.x
        • Behlau M
        • Zambon F
        • Moreti F
        • et al.
        Voice self-assessment protocols: different trends among organic and behavioral dysphonias.
        J Voice. 2017; 31: 112https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.03.014
        • Moradi N
        • Saki N
        • Aghadoost O
        • et al.
        Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the voice-related quality of life into Persian.
        J Voice. 2014; 28: 842https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.03.013
        • Bastilha GR
        • Lima JPDM
        • Cielo CA
        Influence of gender, age, occupation and phonoaudiological diagnosis in the voice quality of life.
        Revista CEFAC. 2014; 16: 1900-1908https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216201415913
        • Morawska J
        • Niebudek-Bogusz E
        • Wiktorowicz J
        • et al.
        Screening value of V-RQOL in the evaluation of occupational voice disorders.
        Med Pr. 2018; 69: 119-128https://doi.org/10.13075/mp.5893.00649