Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 302097, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/302097
Research Article

Reliability and Validity of the Nigerian (Hausa) Version of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) 3.0 Index

1Center for Population Health, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Building, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
3Julius Center, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Received 6 March 2014; Revised 25 June 2014; Accepted 23 July 2014; Published 7 September 2014

Academic Editor: Yaroslav Winter

Copyright © 2014 Ashiru Hamza Mohammad et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study aims to test the translated Hausa version of the stroke impact scale SIS (3.0) and further evaluate its psychometric properties. The SIS 3.0 was translated from English into Hausa and was tested for its reliability and validity on a stratified random sample adult stroke survivors attending rehabilitation services at stroke referral hospitals in Kano, Nigeria. Psychometric analysis of the Hausa-SIS 3.0 involved face, content, criterion, and construct validity tests as well as internal and test-retest reliability. In reliability analyses, the Cronbach’s alpha values for the items in Strength, Hand function, Mobility, ADL/IADL, Memory and thinking, Communication, Emotion, and Social participation domains were 0.80, 0.92, 0.90, 0.78, 0.84, 0.89, 0.58, and 0.74, respectively. There are 8 domains in stroke impact scale 3.0 in confirmatory factory analysis; some of the items in the Hausa-SIS questionnaire have to be dropped due to lack of discriminate validity. In the final analysis, a parsimonious model was obtained with two items per construct for the 8 constructs (Chi-square/df 3, TLI and CFI 0.9, and RMSEA 0.08). Cross validation with 1000 bootstrap samples gave a satisfactory result (P = 0.011). In conclusion, the shorter 16-item Hausa-SIS seems to measure adequately the QOL outcomes in the 8 domains.