Keywords

atrial fibrillation, knowledge, psychometrics, reliability, validity

 

Authors

  1. Li, Polly W.C. PhD
  2. Yu, Doris S.F. PhD
  3. Yan, Bryan P. MD
  4. Hendriks, Jeroen M. PhD
  5. Wong, Cathy W.Y. RN
  6. Chan, Bernice S. RN

Abstract

Background: Assessment of patients' knowledge on atrial fibrillation (AF) and its management is important for evaluating their learning needs. However, a validated and comprehensive instrument to be used among Chinese patients is yet to be developed.

 

Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop and validate the Chinese version of the Atrial Fibrillation Knowledge Scale (AFKS-C) in Chinese patients.

 

Methods: The 11-item AFKS was translated, and then content and face validations were conducted by an expert panel and patients with AF. A sample of 255 patients with AF was recruited from a university-affiliated hospital to evaluate its psychometric properties. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated using the Kuder-Richardson formula 20 and [kappa] statistics. Item analysis determined the item difficulty index and item discrimination coefficients. Factorial and discriminant validity were evaluated using exploratory factor analysis and the known-groups method.

 

Results: The content validity index of the AFKS-C was 0.94, and the Kuder-Richardson formula 20 value was 0.60. The difficulty indices of the items ranged from 0.36 to 0.89, and the point-biserial coefficients of the items ranged from 0.122 to 0.255, indicating sufficient discriminatory ability. The test-retest reliability was acceptable, because the [kappa] values ranged from 0.234 to 0.710. The principal axis factoring analysis indicated a 3-factor structure that explained 50.4% of the total variance. The AFKS-C also demonstrated satisfactory discriminant validity, having yielded significantly different scores between patients with newly diagnosed and established AF.

 

Conclusion: The AFKS-C has acceptable psychometric properties and can be used to measure the knowledge of patients and evaluate the effects of patient education programs.