A psychometric evaluation of the revised Hearing Aid Selection Profile Questionnaire (HASQ) in New Zealand

Abstract

Background: One of the major challenges faced by audiologists is selecting the most appropriate amplification system suitable to the patient’s attitudes and beliefs pertinent to hearing aid (HA) selection. Acknowledging the beliefs and attitudes of the patient is essential for successful selection/fitting of HA’s, increasing the likelihood of good HA adherence and outcomes. There is yet to be a standardised tool in New Zealand (NZ) that can assess HA candidacy and guide HA selection, considering biopsychosocial factors. The HASP shows promise, revised into its NZ version known as the HASQ. The HASQ was modified into its beta version and will undergo psychometric evaluation in this study. Aims: The current study aimed to determine whether the revised HASQ was a reliable and valid measure of patient attitudes towards HA’s pertinent to HA selection. Comparative analysis was conducted with the predecessor study. Methods: The HASQ was administered as an online survey alongside the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHI-A) to patients registered in the University of Auckland Hearing and Tinnitus (UoA H&T) clinic. A total of 60 patients responded, with 46 of those responses being valid for statistical analysis. Cronbach’s alpha was used to evaluate internal consistency reliability of the revised HASQ. Convergent and discriminant validity was measured using Spearman’s correlations to identify associations with the HHI-A. Descriptive statistics and floor/ceiling effects were assessed to measure the integrity of the questions within the revised HASQ. Non-parametric tests were conducted to compare total and subscale HASQ responses between the current study and the predecessor study. Results: The Cronbach’s alpha value of the revised HASQ was 0.81, all subscales sustained good internal consistency reliability except for the Cost, Appearance and Caregivers’ Opinions subscales. Convergent validity of the Motivation and Expectation subscale was demonstrated, and discriminant validity was demonstrated in the rest of the subscales. Comparative analysis showed that the current and predecessor study did not differ in their responses to the HASQ overall but showed a statistically significant difference in responses to the Lifestyle and Physical Function subscales. Conclusion: The HASQ displays reliability and accuracy in assessing patient attitudes and beliefs pertinent to HA selection. The HASQ shows promise as a valid measure for assessing patient attitudes and beliefs pertinent to HA selection. The HASQ has the potential to be clinically useful but is yet to be psychometrically robust. Further steps in development and testing should be to continue performing psychometric evaluations with different measures of validity and trialling in the clinic.