Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Information Needs Questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer and their caregivers

Yu Li; Lihui Liu; Rong Yan; Chunxiang Su; Hong Guo; Xiaoyu Li; Shujin Yue

doi:10.1016/j.ijnss.2021.06.004

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Information Needs Questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer and their caregivers

Int J Nurs Sci. 2021 Jun 6;8(3):354-360. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnss.2021.06.004. eCollection 2021 Jul 10.

Authors

Yu Li^{1

2}, Lihui Liu³, Rong Yan⁴, Chunxiang Su¹, Hong Guo¹, Xiaoyu Li¹, Shujin Yue¹

Affiliations

¹ School of Nursing, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
² Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Ji'nan, China.
³ Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
⁴ Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Ji'nan, China.

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Information Needs Questionnaire (HaNiQ).

Methods: The HaNiQ was translated into a Chinese version using internationally recognized forward- and back-translation procedures. The reliability and validity of the HaNiQ were measured using Cronbach's α coefficient, split-half reliability, exploratory factor analysis, and Pearson correlation analysis.

Results: A total of 207 patients in different head and neck cancer (HNC) stages and 174 caregivers completed the Chinese version of the HaNiQ. Internal consistencies varied between good and very well (Cronbach's α coefficient 0.74-0.90); the split-half coefficient and the content validity index (CVI) of the questionnaire were 83.5% and 83.33%, respectively. The cumulative contribution rates of the 5 subscales in patients with HNCand their caregivers were 62.41% and 61.19%, respectively. However, there are some differences between the Chinese questionnaire for caregiver and the original questionnaire regarding the attribution of items. Items 22, 23, and 27 in the Psychosocial subscale of the English version were assigned to the Survivorship subscale in the Chinese version for caregivers.

Conclusions: The results demonstrated that the Chinese version of the HaNiQ is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring the information needs of patients with HNC and that of their caregivers. Though the structure of the Chinese version was different from the English version for caregivers of HNC patients, the Chinese version of the HaNiQ appears to be reliable and would benefit from further testing.

Keywords: Caregivers; Chinese; Head and neck neoplasms; Needs assessment; Reliability; Surveys and questionnaires; Validity.