Cardiology Research and Practice

Cardiology Research and Practice / 2020 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 |Article ID 1402916 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1402916

Priscila M. S. Cannavan, Fernando P. S. Cannavan, Ulla Walfridsson, Maria H. B. M. Lopes, "Translation and Validation of the Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia (ASTA) to the Brazilian Context: An Instrument Focusing on Arrhythmia Symptoms", Cardiology Research and Practice, vol. 2020, Article ID 1402916, 7 pages, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1402916

Translation and Validation of the Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia (ASTA) to the Brazilian Context: An Instrument Focusing on Arrhythmia Symptoms

Academic Editor: Francesco Fedele
Received05 Feb 2020
Accepted26 Mar 2020
Published10 Apr 2020

Abstract

Introduction. The wide variety of symptoms in patients with cardiac arrhythmias can affect daily living activities. The evaluation of symptoms with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), with validated instruments, can provide information that contributes to clinical decisions and treatment. In Brazil, however, there is no available scale that evaluates symptoms in different types of arrhythmias. Purpose. This study aimed to translate the Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia symptom scale (ASTA-symptom scale) and then validate the questionnaire in terms of Brazilian culture. Method. The methodological process of cultural adaptation used was based on international literature guidelines consisting of forward translation, synthesis, back translation, review by an expert committee, and pretest. Psychometric analyses were conducted with 140 patients. These included measuring internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), construct validity with item-total correlations, and convergent construct validity with correlations with the quality of life questionnaire for patients with atrial fibrillation-version 2 (QVFA-v2). Usability and understandability were evaluated through the usability evaluation of instruments. Results. The translation and adaptation processes were performed by obtaining the Brazilian Portuguese version of the original Swedish instrument. This version presented the internal consistency of items, evaluated through Cronbach’s α (0.79). Construct validity was demonstrated by item-total correlations for the nine items, all except one reached the level of >0.30 (0.24). Convergent validity showed a high correlation with QVFA-v2 (0.89). As for the evaluation of usability and understanding, after two small suggested changes, no additional alterations were necessary. Conclusion. The psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of ASTA-symptom scale evaluated in this study were satisfactory, and the scale was proved to be a valid and reliable tool to assess the symptom burden in patients with different forms of tachyarrhythmia. The ASTA-Br-symptom scale questionnaire can be an important addition to PROMs for patients with arrhythmias and could help healthcare professionals in decision-making.

1. Introduction

There are several forms of tachyarrhythmia. The classification depends on both characteristics and mechanisms, and they can occur in persons with or without severe heart disease, depending on their characteristics and the mechanism of formation and propagation. Tachyarrhythmia may also occur in individuals with an anatomically normal heart, as well as in those with severe heart disease. Ventricular premature beats and atrial fibrillation (AF) are the most common arrhythmias, the latter occurring in 3% of the general population, with increasing prevalence in elderly patients [15].

The most common symptoms in patients with tachyarrhythmia are palpitations, dyspnoea, dizziness, and chest pain. Symptoms such as anxiety and depression, which are less specific, are also mentioned [510].

Regardless of the type of arrhythmia, the manifestations presented by the patients can be both physically and mentally related. This can compromise the performance of normal daily life activities and can have a significant negative impact on quality of life (QoL) [59, 11, 12].

The assessment of symptoms with disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can be a valuable aid when making therapeutic decisions [13]. Therefore, in order to properly evaluate the symptoms, a reliable and valid instrument is required. Most of the instruments aimed at PROMs in patients with arrhythmias which are limited to individuals with AF [1419]. The Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia (ASTA) was developed and validated by a Swedish group and was the first disease-specific questionnaire evaluating both symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with different arrhythmia diagnoses. It is divided into two specific scales, the ASTA-symptom scale and the ASTA-HRQOL scale, which can be applied together or separately when evaluating the patient with arrhythmia. It also assesses the different forms of tachyarrhythmia, which make it possible to compare patients with supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias [20, 21]. The internal consistency of the ASTA-symptom scale was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, construct validity with item-total correlations and convergent and discriminant validity, and concurrent validity was evaluated. Satisfactory results were obtained for all the items [20]. The ASTA questionnaire has been translated into Spanish and Polish and validated in their respective languages [22, 23].

Due to the variety of symptoms and the effects they may have in patients with tachyarrhythmia, this need to be adequately evaluated, but there is no reliable and valid instrument in Brazil for evaluating symptoms. The reliability and validity of the ASTA-symptom scale have been evaluated in other languages, so this scale can also be used in Brazil. However, due to cultural differences between the countries that validated this instrument and Brazil, a translation, adaptation, and validation process is required. Thus, the purpose of this study was to translate, adapt, and evaluate the psychometric properties of the ASTA-symptom scale to the Brazilian culture and also to evaluate its usability and understandability in patients with different forms of tachyarrhythmia.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design and Data Collection

This was a methodological study [24], with the purpose of translating, adapting, and validating the ASTA-symptom scale. Data were collected at the arrhythmology clinic of a public university hospital and at a private clinic specialising in the care of patients with cardiac arrhythmias, both located in the interior of the State of São Paulo.

2.2. Ethical Aspects

The use of the ASTA-symptom scale was previously authorised by the author of the questionnaire, and the research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Campinas (Unicamp) (CAAE: 78539617.7.0000.5404). All participants that agreed to participate signed the informed consent form.

Patients were invited and advised of their voluntary participation in the research and informed that if they withdrew their consent, this would not have any negative effect on their treatment.

2.3. Translation and Adaptation Procedure of the ASTA-Symptom Scale

The ASTA-symptom scale is an instrument developed in Sweden, with nine items evaluating specific symptoms in patients with different types of cardiac arrhythmias. Scores vary from 0 to 27 on a four-point response scale with Likert-type response alternatives ranging from 0 (No) to 3 (Yes, a lot). The scores can be recalculated from 0 to 100, where lower scores characterise fewer symptoms related to arrhythmias [20].

The guidelines for the translation and cultural adaptation of the self-report measures, as recommended by Beaton et al. [25], were used in this study. After the author’s formal authorisation, the translation process was performed.

The original translation was carried out by two independent translators, born in Brazil, whose native language was Brazilian Portuguese, who were fluent in Swedish, and who were currently living in Sweden. Translator 1 (T1) was aware of the objectives of the study, while translator 2 (T2) was not. For the synthesis of the translations (T1 and T2), the versions were shown to the researcher and a mediator, specialist in arrhythmia. The discrepancies between T1 and T2 were analysed and synthesised into a single version of the questionnaire (T12).

The translation of the ASTA-symptom scale back into the original language was carried out by two independent Swedish translators with knowledge of both Brazilian Portuguese language and culture. At this stage, the translators were not aware of the purpose of the study. The synthesis of the version in Portuguese (T12) was made available for the backward translation, which was then translated into the original Swedish language. This translation was the origin of versions BT1 and BT2.

All the previously produced instruments (T1, T2, T12, BT1, and BT2) were reviewed and analysed by a committee of experts that evaluated the equivalences: 1. semantics—maintenance of the meaning of each item after translation into Brazilian Portuguese; 2. idiomatic—adequate translation of colloquial expressions from Swedish to Portuguese; 3. culture—consistency between the terms used in the original version and the corresponding one in Brazilian Portuguese; and 4. conceptual—equivalence between the different conceptual meanings of different cultures, with maintenance of the coherence between the item and the domain to be evaluated. The judges were asked to evaluate whether the situations evoked or portrayed in the items actually assessed the symptom burden.

The committee was composed of eight members: four translators fluent in both languages, a Brazilian nurse with clinical experience in the area of cardiology in Sweden, a methodologist (a nurse practitioner with knowledge of the theoretical framework), a linguist with knowledge of the Portuguese language, and a physician specialist in cardiac arrhythmias from the Brazilian Society of Cardiac Arrhythmias.

The individual assessment of semantic, idiomatic, cultural, and conceptual equivalence by each member of the committee was performed in two steps: (1) judges scored each item on a Likert scale, with a score of 1 to 4, where 1 indicated no equivalence; 2, it was impossible to evaluate the equivalence without the item being revised; 3 equivalent, but needed minor changes; and 4 completely equivalent. In the same worksheet, the judges still had to evaluate the comprehensiveness and relevance of the questionnaire. All the judges were previously advised on how they should proceed in the evaluation. In this first stage, the content validity index, which measures the agreement between the evaluators, was considered acceptable when equal to or greater than 80% for each item of the instrument [26]. (2) After the first analysis, if necessary, the translated questionnaire was modified, according to suggestions submitted by the judges, ideally aiming to achieve 100% agreement by consensus [26]. At the end, the preliminary version of the questionnaire to be used in the pretest was obtained.

For the pretest, 30–40 participants who met the inclusion criteria and also agreed to participate in the study were interviewed. All participants were informed about the purpose of the study, and the usability and understandability of the translated instrument were assessed using the usability evaluation of instruments [27].

2.4. Validity and Reliability of the Brazilian Portuguese Version of the ASTA-Symptom Scale
2.4.1. Patient Selection

A nonprobabilistic convenience sample of patients with a tachyarrhythmia diagnosis was selected. The sample size would be equivalent to a minimum of 10 respondents for each item of the instrument (ASTA-symptom scale) following literature recommendations [28].

The inclusion criteria were people aged 18 or more, diagnosed with tachyarrhythmia for more than three months, without an implantable electronic cardiac device, score equal to or greater than 5 on the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) [29], and who agreed to participate in the study after being informed of its purpose.

2.4.2. Study Protocol

Before the medical consultation, the researcher initiated contact and explained the research project. Interviews and data collection took place in a private room. The data were collected by the researcher through a tablet. Each question and related options were read to the patients so that they could indicate their answers. The following instruments were used: the sample characterisation record (developed for this study), the Brazilian Portuguese version of the ASTA-symptom scale, and the quality of life questionnaire for patients with atrial fibrillation-version 2 (QVFA-v2) [18].

The Sample characterisation record had the purpose of delineating the profile of the sample studied, containing both sociodemographic and clinical information. The QVFA was developed and validated for evaluation of clinical manifestations and treatment of patients with AF [18]. In 2016, Moreira et al. [19] developed version 2 (QVFA-v2) excluding domains related to therapeutics and included the domains: fatigue, perception of disease, and well-being and retained the domains: palpitations, dyspnoea, chest pain, and dizziness. The QVFA-v2 consists of seven domains and 30 questions. All domains have the same score, 20 points, giving a maximum score of 140, where higher scores represent a more negatively affected QoL by symptoms [19].

To perform the collection and data management, the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) [30] platform, a secure Web-based data capture application, was used and hosted on the server of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of Unicamp.

2.4.3. Data Analyses

Means, standard deviations, and frequencies were used to describe patient characteristics and symptoms. The Brazilian Portuguese version of the ASTA-symptom scale (ASTA-Br-symptom scale) was psychometrically evaluated regarding data quality, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability.

The convergent validity of the ASTA-Br-symptom scale with the QVFA-v2 questionnaire was evaluated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient [31]. Cohen [32] suggests the following classification of the correlation coefficient: 0.1 to 0.29 (weak), 0.30 to 0.49 (moderate), and greater than or equal to 0.50 (strong).

The hypothesis tested was that there was a correlation between ASTA-Br-symptom and the following domains of the QVFA-v2: palpitations, dyspnoea, chest pain, dizziness, and fatigue.

The internal consistency analysis of the instruments was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, where α coefficient ≥0.70 was considered sufficient. Construct validity was supported by item-total correlations above the acceptable level ≥0.30. [33, 34]. The analyses were performed using software SAS 9.4 and SPSS 22.

3. Results

3.1. Cultural Adaptation

There were no recommendations from the expert committee regarding modifications for clarification/explanation. In order to facilitate usability, the layouts for some questions were redesigned.

For the pretest, the ASTA-Br-symptom scale was applied to a sample of 32 participants with tachyarrhythmia. Along with the ASTA-Br-symptom scale, the Usability Assessment Questionnaire [27] was answered by the participants in order to evaluate the usability of the ASTA-Br-symptom scale, that is, the understanding of instructions and requests and how to answer them. The majority (93.8%) of the respondents reported that the items were easy to understand.

3.2. Patient Demographics

Data were collected between May and October, 2018. For psychometric evaluation, 140 patients with a diagnosis of cardiac arrhythmias were included, with a mean age of 57.2 years (SD 13.1), 55% (n = 77) female, 62.14% (n = 87) studied until elementary school, 79.28% (n = 111) had remuneration of 1 to 2 minimum wages, and only 32.14% (n = 45) were employed. Of these, 135 (96.4%) participants came from the outpatient clinic of the public service.

Regarding clinical characteristics, 129 (92.1%) participants had a diagnosis of supraventricular tachyarrhythmia and 11 (7.9%) had ventricular arrhythmias, with a mean diagnostic time of 106.5 months (SD 112.1), a minimum of three months and a maximum of 42 years, and 118 (84.3%) were not aware of the type of arrhythmia. Participants with associated cardiovascular disease (62.14%) had a mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 60% (SD 10.7) obtained from the echocardiographic data in the medical record. Table 1 presents the clinical characteristics of the participants.


VariablesN%LVEF

Type of cardiac arrhythmia
 Atrial fibrillation7150.71
 Atrial flutter1913.57
 Atrial tachycardia21.43
 Paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia75.00
 Wolff–Parkinson–White1410.00
 AV nodal re-entry1611.43
 Ventricular tachycardia10.71
 Ventricular extrasystoles64.29
 Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia42.86

Treatment
  Medication13294.29
  Catheter ablation1712.14
  DC electrical cardioversion53.57
 Hospitalisation7855.71
 Associated cardiovascular disease8762.14
 Antiarrhythmic medication12287.14
  Class I107.14
  Class I9165.00
  Class III1812.86
  Class IV32.14
 Oral anticoagulant7755.00

NYHA functional class
 I9668.5762 (SD 9.91)
 II4330.7155 (SD 13.15)
 III10.7160 (SD 0)

Cardiovascular diseases
 Hypertension6949.29
 Cardiac valve replacement1611.43
 Dyslipidaemia1611.43
 Chagas disease107.14
 Dilated cardiomyopathy21.43
 Diabetes mellitus3222.86

Other clinical characteristics and comorbidity
 Hypothyroidism1812.86
 Systemic lupus erythematosus32.14

LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction. Participants could choose more than one answer option.

As to the onset of symptoms, 62 (44.3%) patients reported that the symptoms started during physical effort and 25 (17.9%) either in situations of stress or emotion; 78 (55.7%) had come close to fainting in connection with arrhythmia, and 35 (25%) had fainted in connection with arrhythmia; 107 (76.4) reported that the symptoms lasted on average less than one hour; and 43 (30.7%) reported having symptoms every day.

Regarding the specificity of the palpitations, the patients were asked and could choose more than one alternative, and 122 (87.1%) reported a feeling that the heart was beating fast, 101 (72.1%) felt the heart beating harder than usual, 57 (40.7%) felt the heart beating irregularly, and 33 (23.6%) reported a feeling that the heart missed one or more beats.

3.3. Internal Consistency Reliability

As in the original version [20], the internal consistency of the Brazilian version presented results with sufficient homogeneity, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79. All nine items demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.75 to 0.80 if the item was deleted (Table 2).


ItemsSymptom scaleResponse alternatives
SymptomsItem-total correlationCronbach if item was deletedMean (SD)No, n (%)Yes, to a certain extent n (%)Yes, quite a lot n (%)Yes, a lot n (%)

Breathlessness during activity0.420.781.54 (1.14)39 (27.86)21 (15.00)46 (32.86)34 (24.29)
Breathlessness even at rest0.510.770.99 (1.10)64 (45.71)33 (24.57)23 (16.43)20 (14.29)
Dizziness0.450.780.96 (1.04)63 (45.00)34 (24.29)28 (20.00)15 (10.71)
Cold sweat0.410.780.91 (1.17)76 (54.29)25 (17.86)14 (10.00)25 (17.86)
Weakness/fatigue0.610.751.12 (1.18)62 (44.29)27 (19.29)23 (16.43)28 (20.00)
Tiredness0.580.761.44 (1.21)46 (32.86)25 (17.86)30 (21.43)39 (27.86)
Chest pain0.550.760.93 (1.20)78 (55.71)21 (15.00)14 (10.00)27 (19.29)
Pressure/discomfort in the chest0.560.761.07 (1.15)62 (44.29)31 (22.14)22 (15.71)25 (17.86)
Worry/anxiety0.240.801.48 (1.35)58 (41.43)9 (6.43)21 (15.00)52 (37.14)
—Total cronbach0.7910.45 (6.44)

ASTA-Br-symptom scale: Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in the Tachycardia and Arrhythmia ASTA-Brazilian-Symptom scale.
3.3.1. Construct Validity

The item-total correlations for the nine items in the ASTA-Br-symptom scale reached the level of >0.30, ranging from 0.41 (cold sweat) to 0.61 (weakness/fatigue), all except for worry/anxiety, 0.24 (Table 2).

3.3.2. Convergent Construct Validity

The correlation between “ASTA-Br-symptom” scores and “QVFA-v2” questionnaires evaluated by the Spearman correlation coefficient was 0.89 (), showing a strong positive and significant correlation.

4. Discussion

The translated and adapted ASTA-Br-symptom scale demonstrated generally good reliability and validity properties. The study was conducted using a rigorous methodology, with a sample that included participants of both sexes, with atrial and ventricular arrhythmias and with a sample size adequate for the psychometric tests used.

The ASTA-symptom scale proposes to evaluate the number of symptoms in patients with different forms of tachyarrhythmia. A thorough review of the literature showed that the ASTA questionnaire is the first one specifically developed to evaluate symptoms in patients with different arrhythmias, making comparisons easy between the different diagnoses. It was also found that this is the only study that reports the use of validated scales in Brazil to assess symptoms in this population.

The adaptation of an existing scale is considered more appropriate than developing new ones for the same construct, and there are significant advantages since the researcher can compare data obtained in different scenarios [35].

The use of disease-specific questionnaires is increasingly frequent since it subsidises health decision-making. However, for their wider use, it is necessary to adapt them for different cultures. For this to be possible, the process of cultural adaptation must take place with methodological rigour to maintain the validity and reliability of the questionnaires [36].

Reliability refers to the degree to which an instrument produces consistent results from its scores. When one item is eliminated and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient increases, this item is not highly correlated with the others and could be eliminated from the instrument, but if the coefficient decreases, it means that the item is highly correlated with the others [37]. The internal consistency value by Cronbach’s alpha was equal to the value obtained in the original instrument. In this study, the item worry/anxiety was borderline and increased Cronbach’s alpha coefficient if deleted [20].

Construct validity was supported by the item-total correlations above the acceptable level (≥0.30) for all except one of the items, worry/anxiety. However, this did not lead to a withdrawal from the ASTA-Br-symptom scale.

Regarding construct validity, there was a strong correlation between the ASTA-Br-symptom scale and QFVA-v2 questionnaire, supporting convergent validity.

In the sample, there were no patients with a significant reduction in LVEF, showing that the symptoms eventually referred to as breathlessness, weakness/fatigue, and tiredness may be directly related to the presence of arrhythmia. It should be noted that when asked about these symptoms, the participant should relate them to the arrhythmia, which could minimise the influence of other conditions that cause these symptoms on the participant’s response.

The majority of the respondents found the items easy to understand, and the evaluation of usability and understandability only led to a few changes, suggested by the patients.

4.1. Methodological Considerations/Limitations

The study had some limitations. One of them was that there were few patients diagnosed with atrial tachycardia or with ventricular arrhythmias. Half of the patients were diagnosed with the most common arrhythmia of all, AF. The majority of respondents had low schooling and low income and were included from two areas with different sociocultural characteristics. In addition, due to the country’s geographic size and also because of the economic, cultural, and social specificities of each region, perhaps this sample is not representative of the total Brazilian population living with tachyarrhythmia. Therefore, more studies are recommended that include the different regions of the country.

5. Conclusions

The psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the ASTA-symptom scale evaluated in this study were satisfactory, and the scale was proved to be a valid and reliable tool to assess the symptom burden in patients with different forms of tachyarrhythmia. The ASTA-Br-symptom scale questionnaire can be an important addition to PROMs in patients with arrhythmias and can help healthcare professionals in decision-making.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available in the Research Electronic Data Capture-REDCap platform hosted on the server of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of Unicamp.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

PMSC and FPSC contributed to study conception and design, conducted the data collection, analysed the data, interpreted the results, wrote the manuscript, and also contributed to critical intellectual review. UW and MHBML contributed to study conception and design, interpreted the results, wrote the manuscript, and also contributed to critical intellectual review. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the study participants and the nursing team from the arrhythmia outpatient clinic at the University of Campinas. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)-Brazil—Finance Code 001.

References

  1. C. Blomström-Lundqvist, M. M. Scheinman, E. M. Aliot et al., “ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias: executive summary: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines and the European society of cardiology committee for practice guidelines (writing committee to develop guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias) developed in collaboration with the NASPE-Heart Rhythm Society,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1493–531, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  2. L. P. Magalhães, M. J. O. Figueiredo, F. D. Cintra et al., “II diretrizes brasileiras de Fibrilação atrial,” Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 1–22, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. J. Brugada, D. G. Katritsis, E. Arbelo et al., “2019 ESC guidelines for the management of patients with Supraventricular Tachycardia.The task force for the management of patients with supraventricular tachycardia of the European society of cardiology (ESC): developed in collaboration with the association for European paediatric and congenital cardiology (AEPC),” European Heart Journal, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 655–720, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. R. L. Page, J. A. Joglar, M. A. Caldwell et al., “2015 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the management of adult patients with supraventricular tachycardia: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on clinical practice guidelines and the heart rhythm society,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 67, pp. e27–e115, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  5. U. Walfridsson and H. Walfridsson, “The impact of supraventricular tachycardias on driving ability in patients referred for radiofrequency catheter ablation,” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 191–195, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. M. Kesek, T. Tollefsen, N. Höglund, F. Rönn, U. Näslund, and S. M. Jensen, “U22, a protocol to quantify symptoms associated with supraventricular tachycardia,” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol, vol. 32, no. Suppl 1, pp. S105–S108, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. A. K. Gehi, S. Sears, N. Goli et al., “Psychopathology and symptoms of atrial fibrillation: implications for therapy,” Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 473–478, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. D. Smith, G. Y. H. Lip, and D. A. Lane, “Impact of symptom control on health-related quality of life in atrial fibrillation patients: the psychologist’s viewpoint,” Europace, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 608–610, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. K. A. Wood, C. L. Wiener, and J. Kayser-Jones, “Supraventricular tachycardia and the struggle to be believed,” European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 293–302, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. P. Severino, M. V. Mariani, A. Maraone et al., “Triggers for atrial fibrillation: the role of anxiety,” Cardiology Research and Practice, vol. 2019, Article ID 1208505, 5 pages, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. M. Kesek, F. Rönn, T. Tollefsen, N. Höglund, U. Näslund, and S. M. Jensen, “Symptomatic improvement after catheter ablation of supraventricular tachycardia measured by the arrhythmia-specific questionnaire U22,” Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 52–59, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. J. García Seara, F. Gude, P. Cabanas et al., “Diferencias en la calidad de vida en pacientes con flutter auricular típico sometidos a ablación del istmo cavotricuspídeo,” Revista Española de Cardiología, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 401–408, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. Monmouth Partners, “A guide to patient reported measures–theory, landscape and uses,” 2015, http://www.monmouthpartners.com/assets/pdf/A%20Guide%20to%20Patient%20Reported%20Measures.pdf. View at: Google Scholar
  14. P. Dorian, P. G. Guerra, C. R. Kerr et al., “Validation of a new simple scale to measure symptoms in atrial fibrillation,” Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 218–224, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. M. Härdén, B. Nyström, K. Kulich et al., “Validity and reliability of a new, short symptom rating scale in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation,” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 65, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. J. Medin, R. Arbuckle, L. Abetz et al., “Development and validation of the AFSymp: an atrial fibrillation-specific measure of patient-reported symptoms,” The Patient—Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 319–327, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. J. Spertus, P. Dorian, R. Bubien et al., “Development and validation of the atrial fibrillation effect on QualiTy-of-life (AFEQT) questionnaire in patients with atrial fibrillation,” Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15–25, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. É. O. V. Braganca, B. L. Filho, V. H. Maria et al., “Validating a new quality of life questionnaire for atrial fibrillation patients,” International Journal of Cardiology, vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 391–398, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. R. S. Moreira, L. Bassolli, E. Coutinho et al., “Reproducibility and reliability of the quality of life questionnaire in patients with atrial fibrillation,” Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, vol. 106, pp. 171–81, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. U. Walfridsson, K. Arestedt, and A. Stromberg, “Development and validation of a new Arrhythmia-Specific questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia (ASTA) with focus on symptom burden,” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 44, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. U. Walfridsson, A. Stromberg, and K. Arestedt, “Development and validation of an arrhythmia-specific scale in tachycardia and arrhythmia with focus on health-related quality of life,” Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, vol. 30, pp. 98–108, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  22. A. Peralta-Linares Yesica and V. González-Consuegra Renata, “Validez y confiabilidad de la versión en Español del “Arrhythmia-specific questionnaire in tachycardia and arrhythmia” (ASTA),” Rev Colomb Cardiol, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 305–313, 2018. View at: Google Scholar
  23. K. Lomper, A. Slawuta, K. Dudek et al., “Psychometric evaluation of the Polish version of the Arrhythmia-Specific Questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia: a new tool for symptom and health-related quality of life assessment,” Kardiol Pol, vol. 77, no. 5, pp. 541–552, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  24. D. F. Polit and C. T. Beck, Fundamentos de pesquisa em enfermagem: avaliação de evidências para a prática da enfermagem, Artmed Editora, Porto Alegre, Brazil, 7 edition, 2011.
  25. D. Beaton, C. Bombardier, F. Guillemin, and M. B. Ferraz, Recommendations for the Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Health Status Measures, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, Canada, 2007.
  26. N. M. C. Alexandre and M. Z. O. Coluci, “Validade de conteúdo nos processos de construção e adaptação de instrumentos de medidas,” Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 3061–3068, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. M. Z. O. Coluci and N. M. C. Alexandre, “Development of a questionnaire to evaluate the usability of assessment instruments,” Revista Enfermagem UERJ, vol. 17, no. 3, p. 378, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  28. J. F. Hair, R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tathan et al., Análise multivariada de dados, Bookman, Porto Alegre, Brazil, 6 edition, 2009.
  29. E. Pfeiffer, “A short portable mental Status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 433–441, 1975. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. P. A. Harris, R. Taylor, R. Thielke et al., “Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support,” Journal of Biomedical Informatics, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 377–381, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. M. Pagano and K. Gauvreau, Princípios de Bioestatística, Thomson, São Paulo, Brazil, 2 edition, 2004.
  32. J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1998.
  33. L. J. Cronbach, “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests,” Psychometrika, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 297–334, 1951. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. L. Cronbach, Essentials of Psychological Testing, Harper, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1960.
  35. A. D. Sperber, “Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research,” Gastroenterology, vol. 126, no. 1, pp. S124–S128, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. L. D. R. Oliveira and M. H. B. M. Lopes, “Validation of the Brazilian version of the Gaudenz-Fragebogen: used in the differential diagnosis of female urinary incontinence,” Escola Anna Nery Revista de Enfermagem, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 332–336, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. L. B. D. Gottems, E. M. P. Carvalho, D. Guilhem, and M. R. G. M. Pires, “Good practices in normal childbirth: reliability analysis of an instrument by Cronbach’s Alpha,” Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem, vol. 26, Article ID e3000, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2020 Priscila M. S. Cannavan 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.


More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder
Views230
Downloads165
Citations

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted research articles as well as case reports and case series related to COVID-19. Review articles are excluded from this waiver policy. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.