Validity and reliability of the hearing handicap inventory for adults

Abstract

The Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA) translated into Brazilian Portuguese has been used for clinical practice and research purposes; however, information regarding its ease of reading and psychometric properties are still lacking. Aim:To evaluate the ease of reading and psychometric properties of the Brazilian translation of this tool, including its validity and reliability. Materials and Methods:Prospective study. The questionnaire was applied to 30 normal hearing (Group A) and 113 hearing impaired (Group B) persons. Thirty two participants (group B) answered the questionnaire a second time. The Flesch readability index was calculated for each item in the questionnaire. The internal consistency, test-retest reliability and discriminant validity were evaluated.Results: Flesch's scores showed that the questionnaire was easy to read. Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's correlation showed high internal consistency. There was no significant difference between test and retest scores. Besides, correlation between these two scores was also high and significant. Student t test indicated significant difference between scores for groups A and B (discriminant validity). Conclusion:The Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults translated into Brazilian Portuguese maintained the reliability and validity of the English version. Further studies are needed to determine the convergent validity and construct validity for this instrument. ORIGINAL ARTICLEBraz J Otorhinolaryngol.

Percepção da perda auditiva: utilização da escala subjetiva de faces para triagem auditiva em idosos

“…In this case, the individual will find it difficult to hold a conversation in a group, bothering not only the individual affected, but also his/her family members. The same happens with the TV volume, which must be set higher, leading to irritation and misunderstanding among those who live with the elderly person 24,25 . From this point on, hearing loss could keep the elderly individual away from his social and family circle.…”

“…In an attempt to identify hearing loss in the elderly, and assess the magnitude of the problems they face, self-perception questionnaires such as the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) 25,26 have been used in national and international studies. Results have been satisfactory when compared to the results of audiology tests 27,28 .…”

Understanding Hearing Impairment in Individuals from a Perspective of Social and Emotional Functioning

“…There is now an increased need to understand disability from the perspective of the more holistic ICF classification of disability rather than the traditional pathology-based understanding. Several studies have focussed on this shift in understanding HI from a social and emotional functioning perspective (Newman et al, 1990(Newman et al, , 1991Aiello et al, 2011). The tool used for this study was HHIA which has been validated and utilised in several earlier studies (Monzani et al, 2007;Aiello et al, 2011), and has good correlates with audiometric tests which establish its reliability for use in this study (Newman et al, 1990).…”

“…This questionnaire was translated into several languages like Italian and Brazilian Portuguese, and was tested for validity and reliability against the standard audiometric tests. The results showed significant high correlations ranging from r= 0.90 to r= 0.97 (Monzani et al, 2007;Aiello et al, 2011). Even though HHIA is one of the most common tools used to estimate hearing impairment in terms of social and emotional functioning as validated from research worldwide (Monzani et al, 2007), literature search by the authors did not find any studies which have tried to measure HI in India from this perspective.…”

“…Two questions as replacement questions from HHIE focus on occupational effects of hearing loss (Monzani et al, 2007). The questionnaire is validated and used in numerous studies (Newman et al, 1990(Newman et al, , 1991 after translation into various languages (Monzani et al, 2007;Aiello et al, 2011) where it was proven reliable and valid. The questions had a total score of 100, with social and emotional aspects having the sub-total scores of 48 and 52 respectively.…”