Cultural adaptation and determination of validity and reliability of the Persian version of the parents’ evaluation of aural/oral performance of children questionnaire

  • Fateme Naghibirad Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Jamileh Fatahi Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran AND Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Fahimeh Hajiabolhassan Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Elham Faghihzadeh Department of Biostatistics, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Hessamaldin Emamdjomeh ENT and Head & Neck Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Keywords: Aural/oral performance, reliability, validity, cochlear implant, psychometric evaluation

Abstract

Background and Aim: Parents’ evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) questionnaire is used for children within any age group and any amount of hearing loss. The pur­pose of this study was translation, cultural adap­tation, determination of reliability and validity of the questionnaire, and assessment of its scores in children with cochlear implant versus normal group.Methods: Questionnaire was translated into Persian and was adapted to meet Iranian cultural context. After confirming face validity, the test was given to a group of normal children (n=54) and a group of cochlear implanted users (n=30). It was tested for reliability after two weeks.Results: Test results showed high Cronbach alpha (0.91) and total inter-class correlation of 0.99 which were higher than respective values in the original version. Significant difference was seen in comparison of scores between chil­dren with cochlear implant and normal children (p=0.026).Conclusion: Persian version of PEACH ques­tionnaire, which is the equivalence of the ori­ginal version, seems to have high validity and reliability and it is a useful tool for evaluating aural/oral performance of hearing impaired chil­dren.

References

1. Nelson HD, Bougatsos C, Nygren P; 2001 US Preventive Services Task Force. Universal newborn hearing screening: systematic review to update the 2001 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Pediatrics. 2008;122(1):e266-76.
2. Duchesne L, Sutton A, Bergeron F. Language achievement in children who received cochlear implants between 1 and 2 years of age: group trends and individual patterns. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2009;14(4):465-85.
3. King AM. The national protocol for paediatric amplification in Australia. Int J Audiol. 2010;49 Suppl 1:S64-9.
4. Niparko JK, Tobey EA, Thal DJ, Eisenberg LS, Wang NY, Quittner AL, et al. Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. JAMA. 2010;303(15):1498-506.
5. Fink NE, Wang NY, Visaya J, Niparko JK, Quittner A, Eisenberg LS, et al. Childhood development after cochlear implantation (CDaCI) study: design and baseline characteristics. Cochlear Implants Int. 2007;8(2):92-116.
6. Geers AE, Nicholas JG, Moog JS. Estimating the influence of cochlear implantation on language development in children. Audiol Med. 2007;5(4):262-73.
7. Tait M, Lutman ME. The predictive value of measures of preverbal communicative behaviors in young deaf children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 1997;18(6):472-8.
8. Dettman SJ, Pinder D, Briggs RJ, Dowell RC, Leigh JR. Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits. Ear Hear. 2007;28(2 Suppl):11S-18S.
9. Hermans D, Knoors H, Ormel E, Verhoeven L. Modeling reading vocabulary learning in deaf children in bilingual education programs. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2008;13(2):155-74.
10. Hayes H, Geers AE, Treiman R, Moog JS. Receptive vocabulary development in deaf children with cochlear implants: achievement in an intensive auditory-oral educational setting. Ear Hear. 2009;30(1):128-35.
11. Kumar S, Rout N, Kumar N, Chatterjee I, Selvakumaran H. Performance of Indian children with cochlear implant on PEACH scale. ISRN Otolaryngol. 2013;2013:565096.
12. Ching TY, Hill M. The Parents' evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) scale: normative data. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18(3):220-35.
13. Ching TY, Crowe K, Martin V, Day J, Mahler N, Youn S, et al. Language development and everyday functioning of children with hearing loss assessed at 3 years of age. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2010;12(2):124-31.
14. Bagatto MP, Scollie SD. Validation of the parents' evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) rating scale. J Am Acad Audiol. 2013;24(2):121-5.
15. Brännström KJ, Ludvigsson J, Morris D, Ibertsson T. Clinical note: validation of the swedish version of the parents’ evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) rating scale for normal hearing infants and children. Hearing Balance Commun. 2014;12(2):88-93.
16. Quar TK, Ching TY, Mukari SZ, Newall P. Parents' evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) scale in the Malay language: data for normal-hearing children. Int J Audiol. 2012;51(4):326-33.
17. Emerson LP. Pilot study to evaluate children with hearing aids through PEACH and TEACH in a rural community. Egyptian Journal of Ear, Nose, Throat and Allied Sciences. 2015;16(2):133-7.
Published
2016-07-18
How to Cite
1.
Naghibirad F, Fatahi J, Hajiabolhassan F, Faghihzadeh E, Emamdjomeh H. Cultural adaptation and determination of validity and reliability of the Persian version of the parents’ evaluation of aural/oral performance of children questionnaire. Aud Vestib Res. 25(2):111-8.
Section
Research Article(s)