Why the study?
Hypertension prevalence in Indonesia increased, and knowledge level is an important factor influencing adherence to lifestyle and treatment, prompting the need for a measurement instrument.
The Indonesian version of the Hypertension Knowledge-level Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing hypertension knowledge in the Indonesian population.
Indonesian HK-LS valid and reliable; leaves open routine clinical use pending prospective outcome studies.
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a chronic disease that can cause cardiovascular complications. Hypertension in Indonesia increased from 25.8% in 2013 to 34.1% in 2018. This is an important concern to increase knowledge and understanding of hypertension. Knowledge level of hypertension is one of the factors that influenced adherence to the lifestyle and treatment of hypertension. AIM: This study aimed to develop a questionnaire instrument to measure the level of hypertension knowledge, namely the Indonesian version of the hypertension knowledge-level scale (HK-LS) questionnaire. HK-LS consisted of 22 statement items which were divided into five dimensions, namely definition, medical treatment, drug compliance, lifestyle, diet, and complication. METHODS: Data collection was carried out in May 2020 from five community health centers in Surabaya, East Java, with a total of 245 respondents. The HK-LS questionnaire carried out the translation process, including initial translation, expert panel, back translation, expert committee, pre-testing, validity, and reliability of the final version of HKLS. RESULTS: Based on the validity test, it was known that all HK-LS statement items were valid. For the reliability test, it was known that the Cronbach alpha coefficient of hypertension was 0.758 and non-hypertension was 0.858. The discriminative validity test showed that HKLS scores between the two groups of respondents were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Translation and validation results show that it was known that the Indonesian version of the HK-LS questionnaire was valid and reliable for the target population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ernawati et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: