The reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life questionnaire (RLSQoL) in a trial population

• Published in: Health and quality of life outcomes 2005-12, Vol.3 (1), p.79-79, Article 79
• Main Authors: Abetz, Linda, Arbuckle, Robert, Allen, Richard P, Mavraki, Elena, Kirsch, Jeffrey
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Dopamine Agonists - therapeutic use; Double-Blind Method; Europe; Female; Humans; Indoles - therapeutic use; Male; Middle Aged; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - methods; Psychometrics - instrumentation; Quality of Life - psychology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Restless Legs Syndrome - drug therapy; Restless Legs Syndrome - psychology; Sickness Impact Profile; Surveys and Questionnaires
• ISSN: 1477-7525; 1477-7525
• DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-3-79

The aim of this study was to determine the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life questionnaire (RLSQoL) in a clinical trial setting. Two matching, placebo-controlled, multinational studies assessing the effectiveness and safety of ropinirole for treating moderate-to-severe Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) formed the basis of this psychometric assessment. Validity and reliability were assessed using baseline data. Responsiveness was determined using longitudinal data collected at baseline and 12 weeks. A total of 547 subjects formed the baseline validation population; 519 were used for assessing responsiveness (n = 284/263 and 271/248 for both studies, respectively). Construct validity assessment confirmed that an overall life impact score could be calculated. All item-scale correlations were = 0.4, except items 1 (r = 0.36) and 5 (r = 0.35) in one study. Floor and ceiling effects were minimal. Cronbach's alpha values were 0.82 and 0.87, respectively, confirming internal consistency reliability. Correlations with the International Restless Legs Syndrome Study Group's severity rating scale (International Restless Legs Scale; IRLS) were moderate (r = -0.68 and -0.67, respectively; p < 0.0001). The RLSQoL was able to discriminate between levels of sleep problems (p < 0.0001) and between levels of global health status determined by a Clinical Global Impression of severity (CGI-S) (p < 0.0001). Responsiveness was demonstrated by significant differences in overall life impact change scores between CGI improvement levels after 12 weeks (p < 0.0001). The RLSQoL is a valid, reliable and responsive measure of quality of life for patients with RLS, in a clinical trial setting where group comparisons are anticipated.