key: cord-0000596-qkedjzqs authors: Boivin, Jacky; Takefman, Janet; Braverman, Andrea title: The fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) tool: development and general psychometric properties(†) date: 2011-06-10 journal: Hum Reprod DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der171 sha: e68ff81b1cbbfd6bb525f60a9efdfacf899dabd5 doc_id: 596 cord_uid: qkedjzqs BACKGROUND: To develop the first international instrument to measure fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) in men and women experiencing fertility problems, to evaluate the preliminary psychometric properties of this new tool and to translate FertiQoL into multiple languages. METHOD: We conducted a survey, both online and in fertility clinics in USA, Australia/New Zealand, Canada and UK. A total of 1414 people with fertility problems participated. The main outcome measure was the FertiQoL tool. RESULTS: FertiQoL consists of 36 items that assess core (24 items) and treatment-related quality of life (QoL) (10 items) and overall life and physical health (2 items). Cronbach reliability statistics for the Core and Treatment FertiQoL (and subscales) were satisfactory and in the range of 0.72 and 0.92. Sensitivity analyses showed that FertiQoL detected expected relations between QoL and gender, parity and support-seeking. FertiQoL was translated into 20 languages by the same translation team with each translation verified by local bilingual fertility experts. CONCLUSIONS: FertiQoL is a reliable measure of the impact of fertility problems and its treatment on QoL. Future research should establish its use in cross-cultural research and clinical work. 'Quality of life' (QoL) was defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as an ' . . . individuals' perceptions of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns . . . ' (WHOQOL, 1995) . The WHOQOL measures QoL broadly according to 29 facets (e.g. self-esteem, mobility and safety). QoL measurement is important to identify aspects of fertility problems associated with poor QoL and advance research in health service-evaluation, patient satisfaction and policy-making through the use of a standard measurement tool (Saxena et al., 2001) . Psychosocial studies convincingly demonstrate a high incidence of negative reactions to infertility and its treatment (Verhaak et al., 2007) that impact on overall life satisfaction and well-being (Greil, 1997) , success of treatment (Boivin and Schmidt, 2005) , willingness to continue with treatment (Smeenk et al., 2004) , treatment evaluation (Dancet et al., 2010) and the long-term satisfaction people can hope to achieve if treatment is unsuccessful and they remain childless (Daniluk, 2001) . Therefore, the need to measure and take into account QoL in infertility is imperative and tackling this measurement hurdle could lead to improved patient outcomes. The 14 existing self-report measures of infertility-specific distress, treatment reactions and QoL shown in Supplementary data, Table S1 do not fulfill the need for a fertility specific QoL assessment tool (the table includes details of development sample, content and reference). The fertility problem inventory (FPI: Newton et al., 1999) is the most frequently used distress measure. However, the items were developed without consultation with people experiencing fertility problems and the validation sample comprised primarily Caucasian patients from a homogeneous socioeconomic category using assisted reproductive techniques. Further, the FPI assesses level of strain rather than the broader construct of QoL and does not separate effects due to infertility treatment from those due to childlessness, which is important given the emotional challenges of each. These issues apply to most measures listed in Supplementary data, Table S1 . The most frequently used QoL measure was developed for women suffering from polycystic ovarian syndrome (Cronin et al., 1998) . Several studies have examined its psychometric properties (Jones et al., 2008) and used it to investigate moderators of QoL (e.g. obesity) and cross-cultural effects. Results confirm its reliability and the importance of cultural background as a moderator of QoL (Schmid et al., 2004; Adamson, 2009 ). However, this and other quality of life measures for infertility were designed for specific sub-populations (e.g. endometriosis, male factor) and therefore cannot be used as generic measure for all people with fertility problems. In summary, the need for a quality of life measure for infertility measure has not been fully met. Given the importance of addressing this need, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) joined forces with Merck-Serono S.A. Geneva-Switzerland (an affiliate of Merck KGaA Darmstadt, Germany) to create the fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) measure (2002) (2003) (2004) (2005) (2006) (2007) (2008) (2009) . The overall aim of the FertiQoL project was to develop an international instrument to measure QoL in men and women experiencing fertility problems. Secondary aims were to evaluate the psychometric properties of the tool and to translate FertiQoL in multiple languages. The development phase was carried out according to the protocol used for the development of the WHOQOL measure (WHO, 1998) and is briefly described in the present article. However, the main focus of this report is on the psychometric evaluation. Men and women experiencing fertility difficulties with and without medical experience were sampled from one fertility clinic in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK and two clinics from the USA. Patient advocacy websites in these countries (i.e. ACCESS, American Fertility Association, Resolve, Infertility Awareness Association of Canada, International Consumer Support for Infertility, Infertility Network UK) hosted the online survey. The clinic sample consisted of 291 women and 75 men, and the online sample consisted of 1014 women and 34 men. The Ethics Committee of the School of Psychology, Cardiff University approved the online study and the Internal Review Board of each clinic approved the clinic studies. The Background Information Form covered socio-demographic status (e.g. age, education), medical history (e.g. current illness) and fertility-related characteristics (e.g. duration of infertility). FertiQoL prototype: The FertiQol items were designed to translate abstract concepts (e.g. commitment, sense of belonging) into quantitative items that could collectively indicate the impact of fertility problems on QoL. Full details of item generation for the prototype are described in the Supplemental file and briefly presented here. As shown in Table I , item-generation involved four stages: generating potential items; eliminating redundant, irrelevant and outlier items; validation among people with fertility problems, and cross-cultural survey of acceptability and feasibility. A comprehensive literature review and consultation with psychosocial infertility experts generated an initial pool of 302 items on consequences of fertility problems on QoL in the following 14 areas (e.g. marriage/partnership, social network, emotions, cognitions, coping, treatment, physical health etc.). The authors classified the 302 items into three levels of increasing concept specificity: dimensions (e.g. interpersonal), domains (e.g. partner relationship) and facets (e.g. intimacy) to form groups of items tapping into related aspects of QoL. Classification and subsequent focus groups reduced this pool to 102 items, which were submitted to the acceptability and feasibility study (see Table I ). The prototype evaluated in the present study included these 102 Core items and 27 optional treatment items identified through the feasibility and acceptability phase. FertiQoL was produced in English and translated into 20 languages: Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hindi, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, Swedish, Turkish and Vietnamese (see www.fertiqol.org to download FertiQoL; Korean and Hungarian versions in progress). Cardiff University professional translators carried out the first translation, and two local fertility experts reviewed it to ensure that it was appropriate to local customs and fertility word usage. Cross-cultural data will be presented in a separate paper. The items in the prototype FertiQoL survey were randomly presented and rated on a scale of 0 -4, where higher scores indicated more favorable QoL. The online survey (prototype FertiQoL and Background Information Form) was designed using SurveyTracker software for Training Technologies, inc and the paper version for clinic distribution was designed using InDesign. Webmasters were provided with a hyperlink to the survey. In clinics, FertiQoL coordinators at each site distributed the study pack to consecutive patients who returned completed surveys anonymously in a marked collection box in the patient waiting room. Data were screened and duplicate internet protocol (IP) addresses were eliminated unless of different gender and response pattern. Descriptive statistics and correlations were used to identify the best items for each a priori domain of QoL (e.g. emotional, mind/body, relational and social). This a priori work was done to ensure that conceptually similar groups of items were entered into the factor analysis. Factor analyses (orthogonal rotation) were computed (clinic, online) to ascertain relations among these items. Items with factor loadings less than 0.30 and eigenvalues less than one were eliminated. The FertiQoL total and subscale scores were computed and transformed to scaled scores and summary statistics (e.g. reliability coefficient, mean and standard deviation) produced. Scaled scores were computed to achieve a range of 0 -100, making comparisons between scales easier. For scaling, items were reverse-scored (where necessary); all items then summed and multiplied by 25/k, where k was the number of items in the desired subscale or total scale. Higher scores mean better QoL. For the sake of brevity, only final analyses are shown here. These analyses generated the final FertiQoL, which composed 24 core items, plus 10 optional treatment items). See www.fertiqol.org for final FertiQoL in all languages and for scoring instructions. Table II shows background characteristics and these show that the Clinic group were older, and included more men, single women, same-sex couples and people with a university-education, but fewer American and UK residents and people living in rural/ suburban areas compared with the Online sample. The Clinic sample was more likely to have at least one child, a shorter duration of infertility but less likely to have other health problems. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to screen for problematic items. distribution, high inter-correlations (of .0.80 among item set), poor scale coherence, interpretive issues]. Other items were deleted because they measured broad constructs (e.g. self-esteem) that could be better captured by measures designed for that purpose and that, if retained, would confound associations with those measures in future research. The final FertiQoL item set submitted for exploratory factor analysis was comprised of 24 items from the core set of items and 10 items from the optional treatment module. The 24 core items were conceptualized as reflecting QoL in the emotional, mind-body (i.e. cognitive and physical), relational and social domains. The 10 optional treatment items were conceptualized as indexing treatment environment and treatment tolerability. An additional two items measuring satisfaction with QoL and physical health were retained for the FertiQoL measure to indicate general physical and QoL satisfaction, but were not included in the factor analysis. Wording for these items changed as a result of psychometric evaluation and participant feedback. factor analyses. Table III shows factor loadings for the Online and (in parenthesis) Clinic samples for the Core FertiQoL and Optional Treatment Module domains. The first factor explaining item variance in the Core FertiQoL was the Emotional subscale explaining 31.8% (Online) and 37.8% (Clinic) of the item variability. Other factors (mind/body, relational and social) explained 10% or less of the item variance but all eigenvalues were above one. Loadings showed that items conceptualized to tap into the same concepts all had high factor loadings (.0.30) on their designated factor. Cross-loadings were observed for items of the mind/body (i.e. concentration, life on hold) and social domains (i.e. isolation, shame) onto the emotional domains. For the Optional Treatment Module, the first factor was Treatment Environment, explaining 34.0% (Online) and 38.0% (Clinic) of item variance. There were no cross-loadings for the Treatment Quality and Treatment Tolerability subscales. Table IV shows summary information for all FertiQoL scales. Core FertiQoL and Treatment FertiQoL were normally distributed and individual subscales were normally distributed (data not shown), with only the relational subscale showing mild positive skew toward more favorable QoL in this domain. Potential moderators of QoL (gender, parenthood status and recruitment source) were examined in relation to FertiQoL scores. Women had a significantly lower Core FertiQoL ( The relationship between treatment subscales and six treatment persistence items (e.g. likelihood of trying further treatment, couple agreeing to persist, thinking of ending treatment) was also examined. Greater intention to persist with treatment was significantly associated with better Treatment FertiQoL (r(1026) ¼ 0.172, P , 0.001), especially in the Clinic sample (r(206) ¼ 0.289, P ,0.001). It is currently accepted that to effectively measure the impact of disease, one needs a disease-specific instrument (WHOQOL, 1995) . FertiQol is a reliable and sensitive measurement tool for QoL in individuals with fertility problems. More than 2000 people with fertility problems contributed to the creation of FertiQoL, and it was developed using an integrated mixed-method approach that included literature reviews, international expert consultations, patient focus groups, a cross-cultural feasibility and acceptability survey, and a psychometric survey evaluation. FertiQoL comprises of a Core module evaluating the impact of fertility problems on emotional, mind-body, relational and social domains and an optional Treatment module evaluating treatment environment and tolerability. Subscales and total scales show mainly high reliability and sensitivity of contribute to future research and clinical endeavors aimed at investigating and ultimately improving QoL in people with fertility problems. Certain methodological limitations need to be taken into account. First, despite the multi-disciplinary contributions from experts worldwide, focus groups and a feasibility and acceptability study in 10 countries, the final psychometric evaluation only occurred in five English-speaking countries. Second, targeted efforts to recruit a diverse group of people were not entirely successful in recruiting particular subgroups (i.e. secondary infertile, men). Indeed, more psychometric research on men is required to fully establish reliability and validity. Third, the major proportion of the final sample was recruited online, and differences between the Online and Clinic sample were observed. Although, data generated online have been shown to be as valid as data collected through traditional methods (Bunting and Boivin, 2007; Lieberman, 2008) , one would need to determine whether the differences observed warrant a more in-depth analysis-for example, a different set of norms for clinic samples. We eliminated records coming from the same IP address but it may be possible that the same person replied more than once to the survey. Finally, the subscales of the Core FertiQoL were not entirely orthogonal with cross-loadings on the social and mind/body domains. While these associations are expected, we have now modified the final wording of four FertiQoL items to reduce these crossloadings. Further evaluation of these changes and FertiQoL as a whole on a new sample is required for final validation. These main limitations should be addressed in future psychometric research evaluating FertiQoL. However, the strengths of our mixed-method approach, and consultation and evaluation from infertile people ensure that FertiQoL captures the key life domains affected by fertility problems. It is hoped that FertiQoL will become a gold standard for the measurement of QoL for individuals experiencing fertility problems (whether in treatment or not). FertiQol will be useful to clinicians and researchers alike. FertiQoL can be used to identify people at risk of impaired QoL so that psychosocial resources can be offered and subscale scores could identify the specific domains where intervention might be most beneficial. Recent research has shown a close correspondence between Core FertiQoL and standardized measures of anxiety and depression in a Dutch sample (Aarts et al., 2011) . The availability of FertiQoL in 20 languages will facilitate essential cross-cultural research, particularly in developing nations (Ombelet et al., 2008; van Balen and Bos, 2010) . However, whether cross-cultural differences exist, whether different populations have different mean scores and whether separate cultural norms are needed are all important questions that need to be addressed in future research. A unique aspect of FertiQoL compared with other QoL measures is the optional 10-item treatment module. This module measures QoL in respect of treatment quality (interactions with staff, quality of information), and treatment tolerability (effects on mood, disruptions daily life). These subscales can be used to assess effectiveness of new treatments/medications, to monitor quality of services and to optimize patient treatment experiences. Research has shown that quality of treatment and its tolerability are predictors of treatment satisfaction (Dancet et al., 2010) and willingness to persist with treatment (Olivius et al., 2004) , the latter also shown in the present study. Further a recent large, multi-centered study showed a strong association between a high level of patient-centered care and favorable Fer-tiQoL scores (Aarts et al., 2010) . However, the sensitivity of Treatment FertiQoL for these purposes needs to be investigated in clinical trials of new interventions. In conclusion, the overall aim of the FertiQoL project was to develop an international instrument to measure QoL in men and women experiencing fertility problems, with the collaboration of individuals experiencing fertility problems and international experts in the field. This objective was accomplished and future use of FertiQoL will be essential to establish FertiQoL as an essential measurement tool for practice, research, health service-evaluation and policy-making. Supplementary data are available at http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/. Quality of life measure as an extra tool for delivering patient-centred care Relationship between quality of life and distress in infertility: a validation study of the Dutch FertiQoL Global cultural and socioeconomic factors that influence access to assisted reproductive technologies Infertility-related stress in men and women predicts treatment outcome one year later Decision-making about seeking medical advice in an internet sample of women trying to get pregnant Development of a health-related quality-of-life questionnaire (PCOSQ) for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review Reconstructing their lives: a longitudinal, qualitative analysis of the transition to biological childlessness for infertile couples Infertility and psychological distress: a critical review of the literature Health-related quality of life measurement in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review Evaluation of the stability and validity of participant samples recruited over the internet The fertility problem inventory: measuring perceived infertility-related stress Why do couples discontinue in vitro fertilization treatment? A cohort study Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries The WHO quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL-Bref): the importance of its items for cross-cultural research Infertility caused by PCOS: health-related quality of life among Austrian and Moslem immigrant women in Austria Reasons for dropout in an in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection program The social and cultural consequences of being childless in poor-resource areas. Facts, views and vision in obstetrics and gynaecology Women's emotional adjustment to IVF: a systematic review of 25 years of research User manual. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1998. World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organisation FertiQoL psychometric evaluation Many people contributed to the development of FertiQoL. We wish to thank the sponsoring organizations European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Merck-Serono S.A., the experts in fertility that contributed to item generation and/or verifications of translations, the organizations hosting the online survey, the translation team at Cardiff University and the researchers and students of the Cardiff Fertility Studies Research groups. Please see all contributors at www.fertiqol. org. We particularly want to thank Robert Rebar for his efforts on this project. The European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Merck-Serono S.A. Geneva-Switzerland (an affiliate of Merck KGaA Darmstadt, Germany) have reviewed this article but the views and opinions described in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of these organizations. The study was supported by European Society for Human Reproduction & Embryology, American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Merck-Serono S. A. Geneva-Switzerland (an affiliate of Merck KGaA Darmstadt, Germany). Funding to pay the Open Access publication charges for this article was provided by Merck Serono S.A. -Geneva, Switzerland (an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) one of the sponsors of the FertiQoL project. All authors participated in the development of FertiQoL and its multiple studies. J.B. and J.T. wrote the manuscript, and A.B. reviewed it.