Translation, validation and adaptation of the revised hearing handicap inventory in Assamese language
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20250630Keywords:
Hearing handicap, Hearing loss, Patient reported outcome measures, PROM, Revised hearing handicap inventory, RHHIAbstract
Background: The revised hearing handicap inventory (RHHI), a short questionnaire, effectively evaluates the psychosocial effects of hearing loss in adults, regardless of age. As RHHI is available only in English, its use is limited at the regional level for people who don't understand and can't read English. The aim of the study was to translate, validate, and adapt the RHHI in Assamese language as this is not available in local language.
Methods: The translation procedure followed a traditional translation, back translation, and content validity as per Beatons’s recommendation. The pre-finalized version was administered on sixty-three (63) adults with hearing loss at an interval of one month. Internal consistency of the translated tool was done by Cronbach’s Alpha, reliability testing was done by percentage of agreement by kappa statistics and intraclass coefficient (ICC). Validity testing of the tool was done by Pearson correlation coefficient.
Results: Assamese version of RHHI had good internal consistency, good reliability. The overall Cronbach alpha was 0.944; value of corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.494 to 0.772, indicating the strength of the relationship between each item and the total scale score. Test-retest reliability by kappa statistics revealed significant agreement among the measurements, with p values <0.001. Pearson correlation coefficients test values suggest validity of Assamese version of RHHI.
Conclusions: The Assamese version of the RHHI is a reliable screening tool for hearing impairment in Assamese-speaking adults. Despite limitations of study, findings suggest its potential to understand the handicap and difficulties due to hearing impaired population and for improving healthcare access and outcomes in northeastern India.
Metrics
References
Arlinger S. Negative consequences of uncorrected hearing loss-a review. Int J Audiol. 2003;42:2S17-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/14992020309074639
de Jong TJ, van der Schroeff MP, Stapersma L, Vroegop JL. A systematic review on the impact of auditory functioning and language proficiency on psychosocial difficulties in children and adolescents with hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2023;27:1-11.
Akeroyd MA, Wright-Whyte K, Holman JA, Whitmer WM. A comprehensive survey of hearing questionnaires: how many are there, what do they measure, and how have they been validated? Trials. 2015;16(1):P26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-16-S1-P26
Cassarly C, Matthews LJ, Simpson AN, Dubno JR. The Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory and Screening Tool Based on Psychometric Reevaluation of the Hearing Handicap Inventories for the Elderly and Adults. Ear Hear. 2020;41(1):95-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000746
Ventry IM, Weinstein BE. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear Hearing. 1982;3(3):128-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198205000-00006
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Ånfors S, Kammerlind AS, Nilsson MH. Test-retest reliability of physical activity questionnaires in Parkinson's disease. BMC Neurol. 2021;21(1):399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02426-y
Hornsey S, Stuart B, Muller I, Layton AM, Morrison L, King J, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures for acne: a mixed-methods validation study (acne PROMs). BMJ Open. 2021;11(3):e034047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034047
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Streiner DL, Kottner J. Recommendations for reporting the results of studies of instrument and scale development and testing. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70:1970-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12402
Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J Anaesth. 2017;11(1):S80-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17
Najmi A, Sadasivam B, Ray A. How to choose and interpret a statistical test? An update for budding researchers. J Family Med Prim Care. 2021;10(8):2763-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_433_21
Mishra P, Singh U, Pandey CM, Mishra P, Pandey G. Application of student's t-test, analysis of variance, and covariance. Ann Card Anaesth. 2019;22(4):407-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_94_19
Department of official language. Ministry of Home affairs. Available at: https://rajbhasha.gov.in/en/ languages-included-eighth-schedule-indian-constitution. Accessed on 18 May 2024.
Dillard LK, Matthews LJ, Dubno JR. The Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory and Pure-Tone Average Predict Hearing Aid Use Equally Well. Am J Audiol. 2023;33(1):1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_AJA-23-00213
Dillard LK, Matthews LJ, Dubno JR. Agreement between audiometric hearing loss and self-reported hearing difficulty on the Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory differs by demographic factors. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2024;17:jech-2024-222143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-04901-w
Kaspar A, Pifeleti S, Driscoll C. The need for translation and cultural adaptation of audiology questionnaires to enable the development of hearing healthcare policies in the Pacific Islands: a Samoan perspective. Arch Public Health. 2021;79(1):80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-021-00606-3
Aryal S, Bhattarai B, Prabhu P. Development and Standardization of Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adult (Screening Version) in Nepali Language. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;74(3):4409-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-022-03082-5
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
