Translation of the 5D Itching Scale from English to Malay, and Its Validation among Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease in Malaysia

Introduction

Worldwide, the incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) has increased significantly during the past decades (1, 2). In 2013, approximately 956,200 deaths were due to CKD, which was an increase of 134.6% from 1990 (3). CKD is ranked as the 27th and 19th leading disease based on its mortality in 2010 (4) and 2013 (5), respectively. In Malaysia, there were 32,026 patients on dialysis in the year 2014; of which, 29,192 (91%) were on hemodialysis and 2,834 (9%) were on peritoneal dialysis (6). By year 2040, it has been estimated that the number of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) would triple from existing 2014 figures (7).

Pruritus is a common complication in patients with CKD (8–10). Pruritus usually develops about 6 months after the initiation of dialysis and affects approximately 50–90% of patients (11–14). The symptoms of pruritus range from mild to severe and can be caused by dermatological (e.g., xerosis) or systemic causes (e.g., uremia) (15). Pruritus may present as either an acute or chronic condition (11), be generalized, or localized; and may last from a few months to more than 1 year (16). The most affected parts are the face, back, and fistula arm (17). Pruritus affects the quality of life of patients (11, 18–21), as it compromises physical and mental wellbeing (22, 23). In Malaysia, pruritus affects approximately 60% of patients undergoing dialysis (24, 25).

To assess the severity of pruritus, several instruments have been developed: the 5D itching scale (5D-IS) (26), the Visual Analog Scale (20), the Eppendorf Itch Questionnaire (27), and the Skindex-10 (28). Among these instruments, the 5D-IS developed by Elman et al. (26), which consists of 5 domains with 8 items, is the most promising instrument, as it has been specifically designed to assess pruritus in patients suffering from liver/renal disease or burns. The 5D-IS is a self-administered tool that assesses the impact of itch on the quality of life and is able to detect changes over time (26). However, the 5D-IS has not been validated in Malaysia. Malay is a major language of the Austronesian family, the national language of Malaysia, Brunei, and Indonesia, and spoken by 270 million people (29). Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate the English version of the 5D-IS from English to Malay and to validate the Malay 5D-itching scale (M5D-IS) among patients with CKD in Malaysia.

Materials and Methods

This validation study was performed from May to June 2016 at a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Participants

To assess the discriminative validity of the M5D-IS, we recruited patients that had pruritus (i.e., patients with ESRD) and those that did not (i.e., patients with stage 1–3 CKD). We hypothesized that patients with pruritus would have a worse quality of life (i.e., a higher M5D-IS score) than patients without pruritus. Patients aged 21 years and above who could answer the questionnaire in Malay and undergoing dialysis were recruited from the dialysis unit; while those with stages 1–3 CKD were recruited from the Nephrology clinic. Excluded were those who had pancreatitis, liver complications (e.g., hepatitis A, B, or C), or an autoimmune disease (e.g., systemic lupus erythematous).

Sample Size

Sample size was calculated based on the number of items to participant ratio of 1:10 required to perform this validation study (30). The M5D-IS consists of eight items, of which, seven items were measured on a five-point Likert scale, and one item on a nominal scale. Hence, only seven items could be validated, and the minimum sample size required was 7 × 10 = 70 participants.

Instruments Used

The M5D-IS

The M5D-IS was originally developed in English by Elman et al. (26). It consists of eight items with five domains, addressing the duration, degree, direction, disability, and distribution of itching. The 5D-IS was translated from English to Malay according to International Guidelines (31, 32) (Figure 1; Datasheet S1 in Supplementary Material).

FIGURE 1

Figure 1. Translation of the 5D itching scale from English to Malay.

The duration, degree, and direction domains each included one item, while the disability domain had four items. All items of the first four domains were measured on a five-point Likert scale (where 1 represented the lowest degree of pruritus and 5 represented the highest degree). The fourth domain (disability) assessed the effect of itching on daily activities, and its score was calculated by selecting the highest score. In the fifth domain, participants were asked to select which part of the body was most affected by pruritus, and participants could select as many parts as they wished. If two body parts were affected, the score given was 1; 3–5 body parts affected was scored as 2, 6–10 body parts were scored as 3, 11–13 body parts were scored as 4, and 14–16 body parts were scored as 5. The overall score of the M5D-IS was calculated by summing all the five domains; 5 indicates no pruritus; while a score of 25 indicates severe pruritus (17).

Procedure

Patients were approached while they were undergoing dialysis or waiting to see the doctor in the nephrology clinic. The purpose of the study was explained to them. For those who agreed to participate, written informed consent was obtained. Participants were asked to fill in the baseline demographic form and the M5D-IS. To assess for reliability, the M5D-IS was administered to the same participants 2 weeks later.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Normality was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilks test (33). Since our data were not normally distributed, non-parametric tests were used. Continuous variables were presented as median and interquartile range, while categorical variables were presented as number and frequency.

Validity

Exploratory factor analysis was conducted using principal component analysis and varimax rotation. Items were then screened to identify those with factor loading >0.4 (34). Sampling adequacy for factor analysis was assessed using Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin (KMO), factor loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), and composite reliability (CR), where values greater of more than 0.7, 0.5, 0.5, and 0.6, respectively, indicate a good model of fit (35).

Discriminative Validity

The Mann–Whitney U-test was used to determine whether the M5D-IS was able to discriminate between patients with and without pruritus. The significance level was set at p < 0.05.

Reliability

Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the M5D-IS. A Cronbach’s alpha value >0.70 indicates good internal consistency (36). Corrected item-total correlation (CITC) should be >0.4 to be considered acceptable (37). The Cronbach alpha value was also computed if an item was deleted. Test–retest was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to examine the agreement between the repetitive measures. The ICC values greater than 0.75 indicates excellent agreement, from 0.60–0.74 indicates good agreement; 0.40–0.59 shows fair to moderate agreement, and less than 0.40 indicates poor agreement (38).

Results

A total of 70 participants were approached, and all agreed to participate (response rate = 100%). The majority were males (51.4%), and Malay (67.1%), with a median age of 58.3 (IQR = 15) years. A total of 45.7% only finished secondary level education. Medical treatment was borne mainly by the government (61.4%) and family (34.3%). The majority of our participants were financially dependent on family (41.4%) and the majority (27.1%) only had a monthly income of RM 1,000–2,000 (USD$245–491) (Table 1).

TABLE 1

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants (n = 70).

Validity

Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the M5D-IS had two factor loadings: “daily routine activity” and “pattern of itching” (Table 2). This explained 77.7% of the variance. The overall score of the M5D-IS, as well as for each domain, was significantly worse in participants with pruritus (9.83 ± 0.35), compared to those without pruritus (5.51 ± 0.93, p < 0.001) (Table 3).

TABLE 2

Table 2. Exploratory factor analysis of the Malay 5D-itch scale.

TABLE 3

Table 3. Score of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 1–3 and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with pruritus or without pruritus for Malay 5D itch scale (M 5D-IS).

Reliability

The overall Cronbach’s alpha for the Malay 5D-IS was 0.861. At retest, six participants were lost to follow-up. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at test retest for all domains were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and showed excellent agreement for all items except for the items on sleep and distribution (which showed good agreement) (Table 4).

TABLE 4

Table 4. The psychometric properties of the Malay 5D-itching scale.

Discussion

The M5D-IS was found to be a reliable and valid tool to assess pruritus among patients with CKD. The M5D-IS was found to be a 2-factor model, was able to discriminate between participants with and without pruritus, and had adequate psychometric properties.

EFA found that the M5D-IS was a 2-factor model. The first factor—“pattern of itch” consists of four domains: degree, duration, direction, and sleep; while the second factor was on “daily routine activity.” EFA found that “sleep” fit items that assessed the degree, duration, and direction of pruritus, instead of “daily routine activity” (which was part of the original instrument). This may be because sleep disturbance due to pruritus is a common occurrence, and is dependent on the degree, duration, and direction of pruritus (12, 39). The factor on “daily routine activity” had three items, i.e., leisure/social, house work, and work/school. These activities were disturbed by the presence of pruritus, but did not have a major impact on the quality of life. Previous studies (15, 26) did not perform exploratory factor analysis. Hence, we are unable to compare our results. The M5DIS score was significantly different between patients with and without pruritus, indicating that our instrument was able to discriminate between these two groups. We were not able to compare our results with previous studies as discriminative validity was not assessed.

The internal consistency of the M5D-IS was >0.7, which was similar to previous validation studies (15, 26, 40, 41). This indicates that our instrument has achieved adequate internal consistency. For test–retest, the ICC values showed good and excellent agreement. Our ICC value was lower than a previous study. This could be because we assessed the reliability of our instrument 14 days after baseline while the other study assessed reliability 2 days after baseline (26). Pruritus in our participants could have improved after 2 weeks, thereby lowering the ICC value in our study. Nevertheless, our instrument still demonstrated adequate reliability.

The strength of our study was that we recruited sufficient participants to perform factor analysis and discriminative validity. However, we were not able to perform convergent validity, as there were no other validated instrument available in Malay to assess pruritus during the period of our study. In addition, we only recruited patients from one center using convenience sampling. Hence, our results are not generalizable.

Conclusion

The M5D-IS was found to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing pruritus among patients with CKD in Malaysia. Future studies should validate the tool in English and Mandarin so that this tool can be administered to Malaysians that can only understand these languages.

Ethics Statement

Monash University Human Research and Ethics Committee (MUHREC Approval No: CF16/1766-2016000890) and the University Malaya Medical Centre Medical Ethics Committee approved this study (Approval No: 20163-2303).

Author Contributions

Conceived and design: IR and TK. Data collection: IR, LK, and SL. Analyzed the data: IR, SL, and TK. Interpretation of data/result: IR, TK, DW, and SL. Read and approved the final version: TK, SL, and UP. All authors approved the submission of the final manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at http://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmed.2017.00189/full#supplementary-material.

Abbreviations

5D-IS, 5D itching scale; CKD, chronic kidney disease; VAS, visual analog scale; EIQ, Eppendorf Itch Questionnaire; MUHREC, Monash University Human Research and Ethics Committee; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; KMO, Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin.

References

1. Robinson BE. Epidemiology of chronic kidney disease and anemia. J Am Med Dir Assoc (2006) 7(9):S3–6. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2006.09.004

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Hamer RA, El Nahas AM. The burden of chronic kidney disease. BMJ (2006) 332(7541):563–4. doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7541.563

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Naghavi M, Wang H, Lozano R, Davis A, Liang X, Zhou M, et al. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet (2015) 385(9963):117–71. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61682-2

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Jha V, Garcia-Garcia G, Iseki K, Li Z, Naicker S, Plattner B, et al. Chronic kidney disease: global dimension and perspectives. Lancet (2013) 382(9888):260–72. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60687-X

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Mills KT, Xu Y, Zhang W, Bundy JD, Chen C-S, Kelly TN, et al. A systematic analysis of worldwide population-based data on the global burden of chronic kidney disease in 2010. Kidney Int (2015) 88:950–7. doi:10.1038/ki.2015.230

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. The National Renal Registry. “22nd Report of the Malaysian Dialysis and Transplant Registry 2014”, (2015).

Google Scholar

7. Bujang MA, Adnan TH, Hashim NH, Mohan K, Kim Liong A, Ahmad G, et al. Forecasting the incidence and prevalence of patients with end-stage renal disease in Malaysia up to the year 2040. Int J Nephrol (2017) 2017:2735296. doi:10.1155/2017/2735296

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Bencini P, Montagnino G, Citterio A, Graziani G, Crosti C, Ponticelli C. Cutaneous abnormalities in uremic patients. Nephron (1985) 40(3):316–21. doi:10.1159/000183485

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Ponticelli C, Bencini P. Pruritus in dialysis patients: a neglected problem. Nephrol Dial Transplant (1995) 10(12):2174–6. doi:10.1093/ndt/10.12.2174

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Schwartz IF, Iaina A. Uraemic pruritus. Nephrol Dial Transplant (1999) 14(4):834–9. doi:10.1093/ndt/14.4.834

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Narita I, Iguchi S, Omori K, Gejyo F. Uremic pruritus in chronic hemodialysis patients. J Nephrol (2008) 21(2):161–5.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

12. Zucker I, Yosipovitch G, David M, Gafter U, Boner G. Prevalence and characterization of uremic pruritus in patients undergoing hemodialysis: uremic pruritus is still a major problem for patients with end-stage renal disease. J Am Acad Dermatol (2003) 49(5):842–6. doi:10.1016/S0190-9622(03)02478-2

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Wang R, Tang C, Chen X, Zhu C, Feng W, Li P, et al. Poor sleep and reduced quality of life were associated with symptom distress in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes (2016) 14(1):125. doi:10.1186/s12955-016-0531-6

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Tessari G, Dalle CV, Loschiavo C, Tessitore N, Rugiu C, Lupo A, et al. The impact of pruritus on the quality of life of patients undergoing dialysis: a single centre cohort study. J Nephrol (2009) 22(2):241–8.

Google Scholar

15. Khan TM, Al-Haider I, Syed Sulaiman SA, Hassali MA. Linguistic validation of the 5D itching scale to Arabic in patients with end-stage kidney disease. J Ren Care (2013) 39(4):222–7. doi:10.1111/j.1755-6686.2013.12038.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Robinson-Bostom L, DiGiovanna JJ. Cutaneous manifestations of end-stage renal disease. J Am Acad Dermatol (2000) 43(6):975–86. doi:10.1067/mjd.2000.110651

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Pisoni RL, Wikström B, Elder SJ, Akizawa T, Asano Y, Keen ML, et al. Pruritus in haemodialysis patients: international results from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Nephrol Dial Transplant (2006) 21(12):3495–505. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfl461

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Mettang T, Kremer AE. Uremic pruritus. Kidney Int (2015) 87(4):685–91. doi:10.1038/ki.2013.454

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Urbonas A, Schwartz RA, Szepietowski JC. Uremic pruritus – an update. Am J Nephrol (2001) 21(5):343–50. doi:10.1159/000046272

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Narita I, Alchi B, Omori K, Sato F, Ajiro J, Saga D, et al. Etiology and prognostic significance of severe uremic pruritus in chronic hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int (2006) 69(9):1626–32. doi:10.1038/sj.ki.5000251

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Liakopoulos V, Krishnan M, Stefanidis I, Savaj S, Ghareeb S, Musso C, et al. Improvement in uremic symptoms after increasing daily dialysate volume in patients on chronic peritoneal dialysis with declining renal function. Int Urol Nephrol (2004) 36(3):437–43. doi:10.1007/s11255-004-8788-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Lopes GB, Nogueira FCP, de Souza MR, Penalva MA, de Amorim JL, Pisoni RL, et al. Assessment of the psychological burden associated with pruritus in hemodialysis patients using the kidney disease quality of life short form. Qual Life Res (2012) 21(4):603–12. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9964-x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Kimata N, Fuller DS, Saito A, Akizawa T, Fukuhara S, Pisoni RL, et al. Pruritus in hemodialysis patients: results from the Japanese Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (JDOPPS). Hemodial Int (2014) 18(3):657–67. doi:10.1111/hdi.12158

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Ying SC, Krishnan M. Interpretation of quality of life outcomes amongst end stage renal disease patients in selected hospitals of Malaysia. Int J Pharm Sci Res (2014) 5(1):60. doi:10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.5(1).60-69

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Ibrahim N, Chiew-Tong NK, Desa A. Symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with heamodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Res J Med Sci (2011) 5(5):252–6. doi:10.3923/rjmsci.2011.252.256

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Elman S, Hynan L, Gabriel V, Mayo M. The 5-D itch scale: a new measure of pruritus. Br J Dermatol (2010) 162(3):587–93. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09586.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Darsow U, Scharein E, Simon D, Walter G, Bromm B, Ring J. New aspects of itch pathophysiology: component analysis of atopic itch using the ‘Eppendorf Itch Questionnaire’. Int Arch Allergy Immunol (2001) 124(1–3):326–31. doi:10.1159/000053748

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Mathur VS, Lindberg J, Germain M, Block G, Tumlin J, Smith M, et al. A longitudinal study of uremic pruritus in hemodialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol (2010) 5(8):1410–9. doi:10.2215/CJN.00100110

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Mazanah M, Mazanah K, Adnan Mat J. Bahasa Melayu versus English: a love-hate relationship? SCUTREA, 33rd Annual Conference; 2003 Jul 1–3; Bangor: University of Wales (2003).

Google Scholar

30. Lai PS, Chua SS, Tan CH, Chan SP. Validation of the diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia (DHL) knowledge instrument in Malaysia. BMC Med Res Methodol (2012) 12(1):1. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-18

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol (1993) 46(12):1417–32. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health (2005) 8(2):94–104. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Ghasemi A, Zahediasl S. Normality tests for statistical analysis: a guide for non-statisticians. Int J Endocrinol Metab (2012) 10(2):486–9. doi:10.5812/ijem.3505

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Cudeck R, O’Dell LL. Applications of standard error estimates in unrestricted factor analysis: significance tests for factor loadings and correlations. Psychol Bull (1994) 115(3):475. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.475

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Hoyle RH. Confirmatory factor analysis. In: HEA Tinsley, SD Brown eds. Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (2000). p. 465–97.

Google Scholar

36. Jensen MP. Questionnaire validation: a brief guide for readers of the research literature. Clin J Pain (2003) 19(6):345–52. doi:10.1097/00002508-200311000-00002

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Ware JE, Gandek B. Methods for testing data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability: the IQOLA project approach. J Clin Epidemiol (1998) 51(11):945–52. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00085-7

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

38. McDowell I. Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press (2006).

Google Scholar

39. Lin TC, Lai YH, Guo SE, Liu CF, Tsai JC, Guo HR, et al. Baby oil therapy for uremic pruritus in haemodialysis patients. J Clin Nurs (2012) 21(1-2):139–48. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03906.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Ebata T. Recent advances in the evaluation of itch and introduction of the Japanese version of the 5D-Itch scale in adult patients with atopic dermatitis. Hifu no kagaku (2015) 14(Suppl 23):S1–6. doi:10.11340/skinresearch.14.Suppl.23_S1

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Lai J-W, Chen H-C, Chou C-Y, Yen H-R, Li T-C, Sun M-F, et al. Transformation of 5-D itch scale and numerical rating scale in chronic hemodialysis patients. BMC Nephrol (2017) 18(1):56. doi:10.1186/s12882-017-0475-z

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar