Translation, Cultural Adaptation and Contributions to the Validation of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) for European Portuguese
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.16632Keywords:
Cochlear Implantation, Cochlear Implants, Portugal, Quality of Life, Reproducibility of Results, Speech Perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, TranslationAbstract
Introduction: The Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) scale uses a simple and easily administered questionnaire to evaluate the adaptation of individuals to their cochlear implants. The aim of this study was to validate the NCIQ for European Portuguese, through its translation and cultural adaptation. It also presents the evaluation of reproducibility and the description of the results of this questionnaire in patients using IC.
Material and Methods: Fifty postlingually deaf adult multichannel cochlear implant users (uni- or bilateral) participated in the study. Participants used the cochlear implant for at least 12 months and were patients of the Department of Otolaryngology at the Egas Moniz Hospital in Lisbon. Permission, as well the guidelines for translation, were obtained from the authors of the scale. Translation and cultural adaptation were carried out, in addition to the evaluation of reproducibility and internal consistency.
Results: The participants were 44.0% male and 56.0% female, aged between 20 and 79 years (55.50 ± 15.69). The results of the study showed an overall level of satisfaction of 65.07 among cochlear implants users. The level of satisfaction of the subdomains was 64.40 in basic sound perception, 71.35 in advanced sound perception, 57.91 in speech production, 59.05 in self-esteem, 69.75 in activity and 68.50 in social functioning. Internal consistency (Cronbach α score = 0.96) and test-retest reliability coefficients proved to be strong. Furthermore, the questionnaire’s overall and subdomains average scores did not differ significantly from the results obtained with the original scale.
Conclusion: This adaptation of the NCIQ questionnaire for European Portuguese should be considered a good tool to evaluate the level of satisfaction of cochlear implant users and, so far, it is the only scale in this field validated for application in the Portuguese population.
Downloads
References
Manrique M, Ramos A, de Paula Vernetta C, Gil-Carcedo E, Lassaletta L, Sanchez-Cuadrado I, et al. Guideline on cochlear implants. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2019;70:47-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otoeng.2017.10.012
National_Institute_for_Health, Clinical_Excellence. Cochlear implants for children and adults with severe to profound deafness (TA566). London: NICE; 2019.
Fernandes F, Escada P, O’Neill MA, Silva VC, Monteiro L, Silva L, et al. Guideline: screening and treatment of the deafness with cochlear implants in pediatric age (updated in 2017). Lisbon: Directorate-General for Health, Ministry of Health; 2015.
Fernandes F, Escada P, O’Neill MA, Silva VC, Monteiro L, Silva L, et al. Guideline: treatment of the deafness with cochlear implants in the adult. Lisbon: Directorate-General for Health, Ministery of Health; 2016.
Hermann R, Lescanne E, Loundon N, Barone P, Belmin J, Blanchet C, et al. French Society of ENT (SFORL) guidelines. Indications for cochlear implantation in adults. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2019;136:193-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2019.04.006
Simon F, Roman S, Truy E, Barone P, Belmin J, Blanchet C, et al. Guidelines (short version) of the French Society of Otorhinolaryngology
(SFORL) on pediatric cochlear implant indications. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2019;136:385-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2019.05.018
Messersmith JJ, Entwisle L, Warren S, Scott M. Clinical practice guidelines: cochlear implants. J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30:827-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.19088
Beutner D, Delb W, Frenzel H, Hoppe U, Hüttenbrink KB, Mlynski R, et al. Guideline “Implantable hearing aids”-short version: German S2k guideline of the Working Group of German-speaking Audiologists, Neurootologists and Otologists (ADANO), of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNO) in collaboration with the German Society of Audiology (DGA), the German Society of Phoniatrics and Pediatric Audiology (DGPP), and patient representatives. HNO. 2018;66:S71–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-018-0533-2
Lassaletta L, Castro A, Bastarrica M, de Sarria MJ, Gavilan J. Quality of life in postlingually deaf patients following cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2006;263:267-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-005-0987-1
Bond M, Mealing S, Anderson R, Elston J, Weiner G, Taylor RS, et al. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13:1-330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/hta13440
Hinderink JB, Krabbe PF, Van Den Broek P. Development and application of a health-related quality-of-life instrument for adults with cochlear implants: the Nijmegen cochlear implant questionnaire. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;123:756-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mhn.2000.108203
Kou BS, Shipp DB, Nedzelski JM. Subjective benefits reported by adult Nucleus 22-channel cochlear implant users. J Otolaryngol. 1994;23:8-14.
Maillet CJ, Tyler RS, Jordan HN. Change in the quality of life of adult cochlear implant patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 1995;165:31-48.
Ramakers GG, Smulders YE, van Zon A, Van Zanten GA, Grolman W, Stegeman I. Correlation between subjective and objective hearing tests after unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 2017;17:10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12901-017-0043-y
Krabbe PF, Hinderink JB, van den Broek P. The effect of cochlear implant use in postlingually deaf adults. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:864-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462300102132
Andries E, Gilles A, Topsakal V, Vanderveken OM, Van de Heyning P, Van Rompaey V, et al. Systematic review of quality of life assessments after cochlear implantation in older adults. Audiol Neurootol. 2021;26:61-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000508433
Ou H, Dunn CC, Bentler RA, Zhang X. Measuring cochlear implant satisfaction in postlingually deafened adults with the SADL inventory. J Am Acad Audiol. 2008;19:721-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.19.9.7
Ambert-Dahan E, Laouenan C, Lebredonchel M, Borel S, Carillo C, Bouccara D, et al. Evaluation of the impact of hearing loss in adults: Validation of a quality of life questionnaire. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2018;135:25-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2017.09.003
Crowson MG, Semenov YR, Tucci DL, Niparko JK. Quality of fife and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants: a narrative review. Audiol Neurootol. 2017;22:236-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000481767
Santos NP, Couto MI, Martinho-Carvalho AC. Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ): translation, cultural adaptation, and application in adults with cochlear implants. Codas. 2017;29:e20170007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20172017007
Sladen DP, Peterson A, Schmitt M, Olund A, Teece K, Dowling B, et al. Health-related quality of life outcomes following adult cochlear implantation: a prospective cohort study. Cochlear Implants Int. 2017;18:130-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2017.1293203
Moberly AC, Harris MS, Boyce L, Vasil K, Wucinich T, Pisoni DB, et al. Relating quality of life to outcomes and predictors in adult cochlear implant users: are we measuring the right things? Laryngoscope. 2018;128:959-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26791
Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, Burnam MA, Patrick DL, Perrin EB, et al. Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther. 1996;18:979-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(96)80054-3
Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:1417-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N
Raykov T, Marcoulides GA. Thanks Coefficient Alpha, we still need you! Educ Psychol Meas. 2019;79:200-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164417725127
Cohen SM, Labadie RF, Dietrich MS, Haynes DS. Quality of life in hearing-impaired adults: the role of cochlear implants and hearing aids. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;131:413-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2004.03.026
Hirschfelder A, Grabel S, Olze H. The impact of cochlear implantation on quality of life: the role of audiologic performance and variables. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;138:357-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2007.10.019
Ottaviani F, Iacona E, Sykopetrites V, Schindler A, Mozzanica F. Crosscultural adaptation and validation of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire into Italian. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273:2001-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3765-8
Sanchez-Cuadrado I, Gavilan J, Perez-Mora R, Munoz E, Lassaletta L. Reliability and validity of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire in Spanish. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272:1621-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-2983-9
Dong RJ, Liu B, Peng XX, Chen XQ, Gong SS. Nijmegen [Analysis of reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire]. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010;45:818-23.
Damen GW, Beynon AJ, Krabbe PF, Mulder JJ, Mylanus EA. Cochlear implantation and quality of life in postlingually deaf adults: long-term follow-up. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;136:597-604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2006.11.044
Sladen DP, Zappler A. Older and younger adult cochlear implant users: speech recognition in quiet and noise, quality of life, and music perception. Am J Audiol. 2015;24:31-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_AJA-13-0066
Louza J, Hempel JM, Krause E, Berghaus A, Muller J, Braun T. Patient benefit from cochlear implantation in single-sided deafness: a 1-year follow-up. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274:2405-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4511-1
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Damen GW, Pennings RJ, Snik AF, Mylanus EA. Quality of life and cochlear implantation in Usher syndrome type I. Laryngoscope. 2006;116:723-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000205128.86063.17
Robinson K, Gatehouse S, Browning GG. Measuring patient benefit from otorhinolaryngological surgery and therapy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1996;105:415-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000348949610500601
Roque Dos Reis L, Donato M, Sousa R, Escada P. Tradução, adaptação cultural e validação da escala Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life para o português de Portugal. Acta Med Port. 2017;30:115-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.7794
Cox RM, Alexander GC. Validation of the SADL questionnaire. Ear Hear. 2001;22:151-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-200104000-00008
Cox RM, Alexander GC. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear. 1995;16:176-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199504000-00005
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Acta Médica Portuguesa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All the articles published in the AMP are open access and comply with the requirements of funding agencies or academic institutions. The AMP is governed by the terms of the Creative Commons ‘Attribution – Non-Commercial Use - (CC-BY-NC)’ license, regarding the use by third parties.
It is the author’s responsibility to obtain approval for the reproduction of figures, tables, etc. from other publications.
Upon acceptance of an article for publication, the authors will be asked to complete the ICMJE “Copyright Liability and Copyright Sharing Statement “(http://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/info/AMP-NormasPublicacao.pdf) and the “Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest” (http:// www.icmje.org/conflicts-of-interest). An e-mail will be sent to the corresponding author to acknowledge receipt of the manuscript.
After publication, the authors are authorised to make their articles available in repositories of their institutions of origin, as long as they always mention where they were published and according to the Creative Commons license.
