Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey (MOS-HIV) in people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in China

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey (MOS-HIV) in people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in mainland China. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 646 PLWHA between May 2015 and March 2016 in Dalian, Ningbo, and Zhengzhou City, China. The MOS-HIV includes 35 items and measures 10 scales. These ten scales can be effectively calculated under two summary scale scores, the physical health score (PHS) and the mental health score (MHS), with the physical functioning, pain and role functioning scales contributing to the PHS, the mental health, health distress, quality of life and cognitive function scales contributing to the MHS, and the energy/fatigue, general health and social functioning contributing to both factors. Reliability was measured in terms of internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was analyzed using Cronbach’s α coefficient, and test-retest reliability was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Validity was analyzed via construct validity, convergent and discriminant validity, and known group validity. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were used to test construct validity. A multiple-group CFA analysis was conducted to investigate whether the MOS-HIV measured the same constructs across gender groups. RESULTS: The MOS-HIV questionnaire was reliable and valid. Reliability of the PHS and MHS scales was 0.87 and 0.89, respectively. While the Cronbach’s α coefficients for each of the dimensions were > 0.70. According to the results of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the hypothesized model was acceptable. The instrument showed factorial invariance across gender groups. All correlation coefficients were greater than 0.40, with a range of 0.60–0.94. The correlation coefficients observed between items and other dimensions were lower than the coefficients for the correlations between items and hypothesized dimensions for all scales, suggesting good convergent and discriminant validity. Patients with CD4 counts >500 cells/mm(3) demonstrated better QOL than those with lower CD4 counts on six scales and the PHS (p<0.05) and symptomatic respondents had significantly lower scores than asymptomatic respondents on all the scales except health transition scales (p<0.05) suggesting good known group validity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide evidence that the MOS-HIV may be an acceptable, valid and reliable instrument for evaluating QOL of PLWHA in mainland China.