Spinal Cord Injury-Quality of Life (SCI-QoL) Bladder Management Difficulties-Short Form
Description: The SCI-QoL Bladder Management Difficulties-Short form is a measure of the impact bladder management difficulties on QoL.
Format: 8 of the most informative items from the SCI-QOL Bladder Management Difficulties Scale were selected.
Scoring: The complications experienced ‘lately’ are given a score between 1 (never/not at all) & 5 (always/very much). 1 item is reverse scored between 1 (always) & 5 (never). Items are summed then converted to a standardized T-metric score with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Higher scores indicate higher degree of difficulty.
Administration and Burden: Computer adaptative test (CAT) or Short Form . Approximately 5 minutes.
Psychometrics for SCI: Correlation with full bank score = 0,963 . For the 15 items of the SCI-QoL Bladder Management Difficulties: α=0.91 for internal consistency, correlations (item/total) range from 0.38 to 0.78, Pearson’s r is 0.77 (Ρ < 0.01) for test-retest reliability, intra-class correlation coefficient (2.1) is 0.76 (95% CI=0.70 to 0.81), the fit to a unidimensional model is confirmed (CFI=0.965; RMSEA=0.093), the reliability is equivalent to a classical 0.95 (determined with measurement precision in the theta range) .
QoL Concept: The SCI-QoL Bladder Management Difficulties-Short Form is a measure of the impact bladder management difficulties on QoL, which corresponds to Box E (subjective evaluations and reactions) of Dijker’s Model.
Permissions/Where to Obtain: Assessment CenterSM platform (www.assessmentcenter.net).
**CLICK ON THE LISTED SECONDARY HEALTH CONDITIONS ON THE RIGHT TO READ HOW THE SCI-QOL BLADDER MANAGEMENT DIFFICULTIES HAS BEEN USED WITH A PARTICULAR CONDITION**
- Tulsky DS, Kisala PA, Tate DG, Spungen AM, Kirshblum SC. Development and psychometric characteristics of the SCI-QOL Bladder Management Difficulties and Bowel Management Difficulties item banks and short forms and the SCI-QOL Bladder Complications scale. J Spinal Cord Med. 2015;38(3):288-302.