AUTHOR=Rosato Rosalba , Palazzo Valentina , Borghi Felice , Camanni Marco , Puppo Andrea , Delpiano Elena Maria , Pellegrino Luca , Piovano Elisa , Rizzo Alessio , Rolfo Monica , Morino Mario , Allaix Marco Ettore , Testa Silvia , Ciccone Giovannino , Pagano Eva TITLE=Factor structure of post-operative quality of recovery questionnaire (QoR-15): An Italian adaptation and validation JOURNAL=Frontiers in Psychology VOLUME=13 YEAR=2023 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1096579 DOI=10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1096579 ISSN=1664-1078 ABSTRACT=Background

The Quality of Recovery questionnaire (QoR-15) is an English instrument for measuring quality of recovery in surgical patients, not yet translated and validated in Italian when the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Piemonte studies were planned.

Objective

To produce the Italian version of the QoR-15 questionnaire, to evaluate its factorial structure and to assess the invariance between two types of surgery.

Methods

The Italian version (QoR-15I) was obtained translating and adapting the original version to the Italian context. The validation was performed suppling the QoR-15I to 3,784 patients enrolled in two parallel stepped wedge cluster randomised trials (ERAS Colon-rectum Piemonte; ERAS Gyneco Piemonte). The factor structure and its invariance between types of surgery was tested using confirmatory bifactor model and multi-group analysis. Comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) fit indices and their changes between nested models were used to assess the factor structure and the invariance.

Results

The bifactor model showed good fit (RMSEA = 0.049, CFI =0.957, SRMR = 0.036) and provided a general recovery factor and two specific factors for physical and mental recovery. Eighty-four percent of the common variance is attributable to the general factor, and thus the QoR-15I is sufficiently ‘one-dimensional’ with an adequate reliability (ωh = 0.70). The ωs values for the physical and mental recovery factors were 0.01 and 0.13, respectively. Multigroup analysis supported configural (RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.950, SRMR = 0.035) and metric invariance (ΔRMSEA = -0.004; ΔCFI = -0.002; ΔSRMR = 0.014), whereas the intercept constraint was removed from item 15 to obtain partial scalar invariance (ΔRMSEA = 0.002; ΔCFI = 0.007; ΔSRMR = 0.004). Construct validity was supported by a negative association of QoR-15I scores with all variables related to worse patient condition and more complex surgery.

Conclusion

Our results support the use of the QoR-15I as a valid, reliable, and clinically feasible tool for measuring the quality of recovery after surgery. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses suggest that a unique recovery score can be calculated and support measurement invariance of the QOR-15I across the two type of surgery, suggesting that the questionnaire has the same meaning and the same measurement parameters in colorectal and gynaecologic patients.