Ann Rehabil Med.  2017 Aug;41(4):667-676. 10.5535/arm.2017.41.4.667.

Is WHODAS 2.0 Useful for Colorectal Cancer Survivors?

• Lee HH
• Shin EK
• Shin HI
• Yang EJ

• KMID: 2389413
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2017.41.4.667

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
To compare the disability level of colorectal cancer survivors with and without stoma by using the Korean version of the 12-item, interview-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (Korean version of WHODAS 2.0).
METHODS
This is a multicenter (five tertiary university hospitals and the Korea Ostomy Association) and cross-sectional survey. Colorectal cancer survivors with and without stoma were interviewed. Survey measured disability level using the Korean version of WHODAS 2.0 and health-related quality of life using the SF-36.
RESULTS
A significant difference was observed between patients with and without a stoma in two subdomains: getting around (31.1 vs. 20.3; p=0.013) and participation in society (32.3 vs. 22.2; p=0.028). After adjusting for age, gender, and time since surgery, having a stoma was associated with severe to extreme disabilities in participation (OR=2.72, p=0.045). The Korean version of WHODAS 2.0 showed satisfactory internal consistency (r=0.96) and convergent validity.
CONCLUSION
Patients with stoma participated less in society than those without stoma. The Korean version of WHODAS 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring disability in Korean colorectal cancer patients.

Keyword

International Classification of Functioning; Disability and Health (ICF); Colorectal neoplasms; Surgical stomas; Quality of life

MeSH Terms

Appointments and Schedules
Colorectal Neoplasms*
Cross-Sectional Studies
Hospitals, University
Humans
Korea
Ostomy
Quality of Life
Surgical Stomas
Survivors*
World Health Organization

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) scores (mean) in relation to stoma status.

• 

  Fig. 2 Prevalence of different ICF categories by The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) domain score for colorectal cancer patients with and without a stoma. ICF, International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.

Reference

1. Adderson EE, Boudreaux JW, Cummings JR, Pounds S, Wilson DA, Procop GW, et al. Identification of clinical coryneform bacterial isolates: comparison of biochemical methods and sequence analysis of 16S rRNA and rpoB genes. J Clin Microbiol. 2008; 46:921–927. PMID: 18160450.

2. Royse CF, Newman S, Chung F, Stygall J, McKay RE, Boldt J, et al. Development and feasibility of a scale to assess postoperative recovery: the post-operative quality recovery scale. Anesthesiology. 2010; 113:892–905. PMID: 20601860.

3. Wilson TR, Alexander DJ. Clinical and non-clinical factors influencing postoperative health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2008; 95:1408–1415. PMID: 18844250.

4. Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, Eckel R, Sauer H, Holzel D. Quality of life in rectal cancer patients: a four-year prospective study. Ann Surg. 2003; 238:203–213. PMID: 12894013.

5. Hohenberger W, Merkel S, Matzel K, Bittorf B, Papadopoulos T, Gohl J. The influence of abdomino-peranal (intersphincteric) resection of lower third rectal carcinoma on the rates of sphincter preservation and locoregional recurrence. Colorectal Dis. 2006; 8:23–33. PMID: 16519634.

6. Dumont F, Ayadi M, Goere D, Honore C, Elias D. Comparison of fecal continence and quality of life between intersphincteric resection and abdominoperineal resection plus perineal colostomy for ultra-low rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2013; 108:225–229. PMID: 23868337.

7. Pachler J, Wille-Jorgensen P. Quality of life after rectal resection for cancer, with or without permanent colostomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 12:CD004323. PMID: 23235607.

8. Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Rehm J, Kennedy C, Epping-Jordan J, et al. Developing the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ. 2010; 88:815–823. PMID: 21076562.

9. Sousa RM, Dewey ME, Acosta D, Jotheeswaran AT, Castro-Costa E, Ferri CP, et al. Measuring disability across cultures: the psychometric properties of the WHODAS II in older people from seven low- and middle-income countries. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group population-based survey. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2010; 19:1–17.

10. Von Korff M, Crane PK, Alonso J, Vilagut G, Angermeyer MC, Bruffaerts R, et al. Modified WHODAS-II provides valid measure of global disability but filter items increased skewness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61:1132–1143. PMID: 18619808.

11. Luciano JV, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Fernandez A, Serrano-Blanco A, Roca M, Haro JM. Psychometric properties of the twelve item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHO-DAS II) in Spanish primary care patients with a first major depressive episode. J Affect Disord. 2010; 121:52–58. PMID: 19464735.

12. Zhao HP, Liu Y, Li HL, Ma L, Zhang YJ, Wang J. Activity limitation and participation restrictions of breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: psychometric properties and validation of the Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0. Qual Life Res. 2013; 22:897–906. PMID: 22684528.

13. Yoon JS, Kim JM, Shin IS, Yang SJ, Zheng TJ, Lee HY. Development of Korean version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II-K) in community dwelling elders. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc. 2004; 43:86–92.

14. World Health Organization. WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization;c2017. cited 2017 Jul 1. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/index4.html.

15. Prince M, Glozier N, Sousa R, Dewey M. Measuring disability across physical, mental and cognitive disorders. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing Inc;2010.

16. Han CW, Lee EJ, Iwaya T, Kataoka H, Kohzuki M. Development of the Korean version of Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey: health related QOL of healthy elderly people and elderly patients in Korea. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2004; 203:189–194. PMID: 15240928.

17. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall;2000.

18. Deimling GT, Sterns S, Bowman KF, Kahana B. Functioning and activity participation restrictions among older adult, long-term cancer survivors. Cancer Invest. 2007; 25:106–116. PMID: 17453822.

19. Neuman HB, Patil S, Fuzesi S, Wong WD, Weiser MR, Guillem JG, et al. Impact of a temporary stoma on the quality of life of rectal cancer patients undergoing treatment. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18:1397–1403. PMID: 21128000.

20. Orsini RG, Thong MS, van de Poll-Franse LV, Slooter GD, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Rutten HJ, et al. Quality of life of older rectal cancer patients is not impaired by a permanent stoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013; 39:164–170. PMID: 23177350.

21. Schmidt CE, Bestmann B, Kuchler T, Longo WE, Rohde V, Kremer B. Gender differences in quality of life of patients with rectal cancer: a five-year prospective study. World J Surg. 2005; 29:1630–1641. PMID: 16311851.

22. Sideris L, Zenasni F, Vernerey D, Dauchy S, Lasser P, Pignon JP, et al. Quality of life of patients operated on for low rectal cancer: impact of the type of surgery and patients' characteristics. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005; 48:2180–2191. PMID: 16228842.

23. Aaronson N, Alonso J, Burnam A, Lohr KN, Patrick DL, Perrin E, et al. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002; 11:193–205. PMID: 12074258.

24. Garin O, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Almansa J, Nieto M, Chatterji S, Vilagut G, et al. Validation of the “World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS-2” in patients with chronic diseases. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010; 8:51. PMID: 20482853.

25. Chwastiak LA, Von Korff M. Disability in depression and back pain: evaluation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO DAS II) in a primary care setting. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56:507–514. PMID: 12873644.