Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 12, 2026
Development of a Virtual Reality Assessment of Everyday Living Skills
Published on: April 23, 2014
Validity and responsiveness of VELO: a velopharyngeal insufficiency quality of life measure
Jonathan R Skirko1, Edward M Weaver, Jonathan A Perkins
1Department of Otolaryngology, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 356515, Seattle, WA 98195-6515, USA. jskirko@uw.edu
Objective:
Test the Velopharyngeal Insufficiency (VPI) Effects on Life Outcomes (VELO) instrument for validity, reliability, and responsiveness.
Study Design:
Observational cohort.
Setting:
Academic tertiary medical center.
Subjects:
Children with VPI (n = 59) and their parents (n = 84) were prospectively enrolled from a pediatric VPI clinic.
Methods:
Pediatric speech language pathologists diagnosed VPI using perceptual speech analysis and rated VPI severity and speech intelligibility deficit (each as minimal, mild, moderate, or severe). All parents and youth 8+ years old (n = 24) completed the VELO instrument and other quality-of-life questionnaires at baseline; the first 40 subjects completed the VELO instrument again 2 weeks later. Treatments included Furlow palatoplasty (n = 20), sphincter pharyngoplasty (n = 14), or an obturator (n = 2), and 29 of 36 (81%) subjects completed the questionnaires 3 months posttreatment. VELO was tested with correlations for criterion validity against VPI severity, construct validity against speech intelligibility and velopharyngeal gap size, and concurrent validity against other quality-of-life measures (r > .40 demonstrating validity); for test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation (>.6 demonstrating reliability); and for responsiveness with the 3-month posttreatment measure using the paired t test.
Results:
Parental responses are reported; youth responses showed similar results. The VELO instrument did not meet criterion validity (r = -.18, P = .10), or functional construct validity (r = -.37, P = .001), but did meet anatomic construct and concurrent validity (each r > .50, P < .01). VELO scores demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (r = .85, P < .001) and responsiveness (baseline 54 ± 14 to posttreatment 70 ± 18, P < .001).
Conclusion:
VELO provides a VPI-specific quality-of-life instrument that demonstrates concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness to change in quality of life with treatment.
Related Concept Videos
01:29Assessment of Ventilation II: Respiratory Depth and Rhythm
Respiratory depth measures the volume of air inhaled or exhaled during a breath. It can vary from shallow to deep and typically remains consistent when a person is at rest or asleep. Occasionally, individuals will automatically inhale deeply, known as sighing, which inflates the lungs with more air than normal breathing.
To assess respiratory depth, observe the degree of chest excursion or movement:
01:20Assessment of Ventilation I: Respiratory Rate
A Ventilation assessment is critical for monitoring a patient's health status. Respiration, one of the most accessible vital signs, provides insights into the function of numerous body systems and can indicate serious health issues, such as brainstem injuries from head trauma.
Critical Guidelines for Assessing Ventilation:
01:25Pulmonary Function Tests
Pulmonary Function Tests are crucial diagnostic tools for assessing respiratory function, particularly in patients with chronic respiratory disorders. They comprehensively evaluate lung volumes, ventilatory function, breathing mechanics, diffusion, and gas exchange. These tests help diagnose pulmonary diseases and play a significant role in monitoring disease progression, evaluating disability, and assessing response to therapy.
PFTs involve using a spirometer, a...
01:15Respiratory Volumes
Tidal Volume (TV) Tidal volume (TV) is the air inhaled or exhaled in a...
01:26Respiratory Volumes and Capacities I
01:22Respiratory Volumes and Capacities