Validation of the Chinese version of the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS)

Hao Wu, Xin Zhao, Shuaishuai Chu, Fangxia Xu, Jia Song, Zhengliang Ma, Xiaoping Gu, Hao Wu, Xin Zhao, Shuaishuai Chu, Fangxia Xu, Jia Song, Zhengliang Ma, Xiaoping Gu

Abstract

Background: Preoperative anxiety is an unpleasant state of tension that may impact patients' post-operative pain and satisfaction. The level of preoperative anxiety should be routinely identified. The Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) is a self-reported questionnaire that is used to quickly assess preoperative anxiety and information needs with good psychometric properties.

Objectives: To validate the Chinese version of the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) and to explore coping strategies used by patients in dealing with surgery and anesthetic.

Methods: The cross-cultural validation of APAIS involved the translation of a Chinese version of APAIS and an investigation of its psychometric properties and clinical applicability. Forward-back translation and a pilot study were performed to produce a Chinese adaptation of APAIS. The inpatients of the orthopedic, otolaryngology, and general surgery department scheduled for general anesthesia surgery were enrolled to complete psychometric testing. The reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were calculated to assess construct validity. The criteria validity was analyzed using the correlation between APAIS and State-trait anxiety inventory-state (STAI-S) and Visual analogue scale-anxiety (VAS-A). Coping styles were evaluated using the Medical Coping Modes Questionnaire (MCMQ) score that covered three domains: confrontation, avoidance, and resignation. The impact of different coping styles on patients' anxiety was explored.

Results: A total of 204 valid questionnaires were collected the day before surgery. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.862 for the anxiety scale and 0.830 for the information scale. Exploratory factor analysis with oblique rotation revealed two factors that explained 76.45% of the total variances. A confirmatory factor analysis showed a two-factor model with an adequate model fit (root mean square error of approximation: 0.073, goodness-of-fit: 0.966). The APAIS anxiety score significantly correlated with STAI-S (r = 0.717, P < 0.01) and VAS-A (r = 0.720, P < 0.01). For the three coping strategies, preoperative anxiety had a low correlation with confrontation (r = 0.33, P < 0.01) and resignation (r = 0.22, P < 0.05).

Conclusions: The Chinese version of APAIS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing preoperative anxiety. Use of this measurement tool for Chinese patients is feasible and shows promising results.

Keywords: Coping styles; Preoperative anxiety; Questionnaires; Validation studies.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Norris W, Baird WLM. Pre-operative anxiety - a study of incidence and aetiology. Br J Anaesth. 1967;39(6):503–509. doi: 10.1093/bja/39.6.503.
    1. Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Page GG, Marucha PT, et al. Psychological influences on surgical recovery - perspectives from psychoneuroimmunology. Am Psychol. 1998;53(11):1209–1218. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.11.1209.
    1. Kalkman JC, Visser K, Moen J, Bonsel JG, et al. Preoperative prediction of severe postoperative pain. Pain. 2003;105(3):415–423. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00252-5.
    1. Laufenberg-Feldmann R, Kappis B. Assessing preoperative anxiety using a questionnaire and clinical rating: a prospective observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2013;30(12):758–763. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e3283631751.
    1. Moerman N, van Dam FS, Muller MJ, et al. The Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale (APAIS) Anesth Analg. 1996;82(3):445–451.
    1. Boker A, Brownell L, Donen N. The Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale provides a simple and reliable measure of preoperative anxiety. Can J Anaesth. 2002;49(8):792–798. doi: 10.1007/BF03017410.
    1. Nishimori M, Moerman N, Fukuhara S, et al. Translation and validation of the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale (APAIS) for use in Japan. Qual Life Res. 2002;11(4):361–364. doi: 10.1023/A:1015561129899.
    1. Berth H, Petrowski K, Balck F. The Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale (APAIS) - the first trial of a German version. Psychosoc Med. 2007;4:1–8.
    1. Axel MS, Loundou A, Capdevila X, et al. Validation of the French version of the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale (APAIS) Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11(166):1–7.
    1. Buonanno P, Laiola A, Palumbo C, et al. Italian validation of the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale. Minerva Anestesiol. 2017;83(7):705–711.
    1. Vergara-Romero M, Morales-Asencio JM, Morales-Fernández A, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety and information scale (APAIS) Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):120. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0695-8.
    1. Stein DJ. Social anxiety disorder in the west and in the east. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 2009;21(2):109–117.
    1. Kan W, Lingyu L, Tomoko K, et al. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the TaijinKyofusho (TKS) scale. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2018;26(1):35–38.
    1. Montero-Marin J, Prado-Abril J, Piva Demarzo MM, Gascon S, Garcia-Campayo J. Coping with stress and types of burnout: explanatory power of different coping strategies. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e89090. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089090.
    1. Folkman S. Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45(8):1207–1221. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)00040-3.
    1. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(2):268–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
    1. Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene RE. State trait anxiety inventory manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1970.
    1. Abend R, Dan O, Maoz K, et al. Reliability, validity and sensitivity of a computerized visual analog scale measuring state anxiety. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2014;45(4):447–453. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.06.004.
    1. Xiaohong S, Qianjin J. Report on application of Chinese version of MCMQ in 701 patients. Chin J Behav Med Sci. 2000;9(1):18–20.
    1. Ray C, Lindop J, Gibson S. The concept of coping. Psychol Med. 1982;12(2):385–395. doi: 10.1017/S0033291700046729.
    1. Roussi P, Miller SM. Monitoring style of coping with cancer related threats: a review of the literature. J Behav Med. 2014;37(5):931–954. doi: 10.1007/s10865-014-9553-x.
    1. Sand M, Hessam S, Sand D, et al. Stress-coping styles of 459 emergency care physicians in Germany: a pilot study. Anaesthesist. 2016;65(11):841–846. doi: 10.1007/s00101-016-0228-6.
    1. Aust H, Rüsch D, Schuster M, et al. Coping strategies in anxious surgical patients. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;12(16):250. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1492-5.
    1. Miller SM, Mangan CE. Monitoring-blunting cognitive coping style, preoperative information and preoperative anxiety. A systematic review. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;45(1):223–236. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.223.
    1. Büssing A, Matthiessen PF, Mundle G. Emotional and rational disease acceptance in patients with depression and alcohol addiction. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;21(6):4. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-4.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe