Translation and validation of the Chinese-Cantonese version of the Exercise of Self-Care Agency Scale.
ABSTRACT Effective self-care is important in the management of dysmenorrhea. Yet measures of adolescents' capabilities or self-care agency to exercise self-care to cope with dysmenorrhea are limited in the Chinese population.
The aims of this study were to translate the Exercise of Self-Care Agency Scale (ESCAS) from English into Chinese-Cantonese, and to evaluate its reliability and validity in the Chinese adolescent girls with dysmenorrhea.
This study consisted of three phases. In phase 1, the ESCAS was translated into Chinese-Cantonese using Brislin's (1986) translation and back-translation method, the semantic equivalence and content validity were assessed. In phase 2, a cross-over design was used to assess the translation adequacy of the Chinese-Cantonese version. In phase 3, the psychometric properties of the Chinese-Cantonese version were tested with a convenience sample of 477 adolescent girls recruited from three secondary schools. The reliability was assessed by internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The construct validity was tested using exploratory factor analysis.
The semantic equivalence and content validity index of the Chinese-Cantonese version of ESCAS was satisfactory. Results also indicated that the Chinese-Cantonese version had a high level of equivalence with the original English version and demonstrated a high internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Exploratory factor analysis revealed the presence of four factors supporting the conceptual dimension of the original instrument.
The current study provides initial psychometric properties of the Chinese-Cantonese version of the ESCAS and supports it as a reliable and valid instrument to measure self-care agency in adolescent girls with dysmenorrhea. It provides health care professionals with a useful tool to assess the extent to which adolescent girls take action towards their problem of dysmenorrhea.
- SourceAvailable from: Peter Donald GriffithsInternational journal of nursing studies 05/2013; · 1.91 Impact Factor