According to the World Health Organization, Europe is the region of the world with the highest levels of alcohol consumption. [1
]. Recent data report that 69% of the Portuguese population consumed alcohol in the last 12 months, 21% consumed alcohol daily, and 3.5% have abusive consumption or dependence [2
]. In 2020, there were 35,390 hospitalizations in Portugal related to primary or secondary diagnoses attributable to alcohol consumption, representing 3% of all hospitalizations [2
A comprehensive approach to alcohol-related problems should include identifying health professionals’ attitudes toward alcohol, alcohol users, and alcohol-related disorders. [3
]. Negative attitudes, which are sometimes observed in health professionals, have been documented as one of the obstacles to the treatment of people with alcohol consumption disorders. Adequate knowledge and positive feelings and attitudes of health professionals are essential prerequisites for the effectiveness of alcohol-related disorders’ treatment and educational interventions [3
The Attitudes toward Alcohol, Alcoholism and People with Alcohol-related Disorders Scale (EAFAA) was originally developed in Brazil to evaluate health professionals’ attitudes [3
]. The EAFAA has already been adapted and validated for Spanish [4
] and American English [6
]. Based on our previous research, it was not possible to identify any instrument that allowed us to evaluate these attitudes in Portuguese samples. Only instruments for assessing personal expectations and beliefs about alcohol [8
], adolescents’ expectations about alcohol [9
], and mental health literacy about alcohol abuse in adolescents [10
] have been identified.
The aim of this study is to adapt the EAFAA linguistically and culturally to Portuguese health professionals.
Between January and February 2021, a methodological study was carried out for the linguistic and cultural adaptation of the EAFAA, from Brazilian Portuguese (BR) to Portuguese (PT). We used the guidelines from Beaton et al. [11
], which include translation, synthesis, back-translation, review by an expert committee, and a pre-test.
Translation was done independently by two Portuguese native speakers. One of them had knowledge of the topic and the other one had a degree in Languages. Two translated versions of the EAFAA-Translation, 1 (T1) and 2 (T2), were obtained.
For synthesis, T1 and T2 were analyzed by three persons with postgraduate training. Two of them were experts in addictive behaviors. The objective of this phase was to identify and analyze divergences and reach a consensus on a synthesized version (S1).
Back-translation of S1 to the original language (BR) was carried out independently by two Brazilian researchers. Both had postgraduate training in mental health and addictive behaviors and experience in scientific writing in both languages (PT and BR). The two back-translations (BT1 and BT2) were then synthesized into Synthesis 2 (S2). This version was presented to the original author to determine whether it was coherent with the original objectives and meanings.
Review by an expert committee was conducted by a group of experts with clinical experience in alcohol-use disorders. The committee included a psychologist, a psychiatrist, a general practice nurse, and a nurse who specialized in mental health and psychiatric nursing who also had experience in the development and cross-cultural adaptation of instruments. The experts were provided with a questionnaire, sent to them by e-mail, to assess S2. They were asked to consider aspects such as relevance, clarity, semantic equivalence, and conceptual equivalence. They were also asked to make suggestions for each item and for the title and to give feedback on the overall instrument. The assessment was made using a 5-point Likert-type scale, from ‘1- Strongly Disagree’ to ‘5- Strongly Agree’. Agreement analysis was conducted, based on the calculation of the Content Validity Index (CVI), which had to be above 0.80 to be considered acceptable. Only items scored with 3 or more points on the Likert scale were considered valid for agreement.
A pre-test of the pre-final version was made to assess the comprehensibility and proper functioning of the online questionnaire. We used a convenience sample of 34 participants, which included final-year nursing-degree students and nurses studying for a master’s degree in nursing at a nursing school in Portugal.
All data were transferred to the computers of three researchers and protected by a password.
The adaptation process required some changes to the original instrument. There were discrepancies both in the translation (T1 and T2) and back-translation (BT1 and BT2) phases.
The expression ‘alcoholism’ was replaced with ‘alcohol-related problems’. This change occurred in all items and in the instrument’s title. This expression allowed for a much broader perspective that considered not only the substance itself but also its multidimensional impact.
The need to adapt the expression ‘alcohol-related disorders’ to ‘alcohol consumption disorder’ was also considered, given that this is the technical expression used in Portugal. For the same reason, the expression ‘alcohol use’ was adapted to ‘alcohol consumption’.
The personal pronouns at the beginning of each item were omitted to improve fluidity in reading.
We chose to use the expression ‘person’ instead of the original expressions ‘individual’, ‘patient’, and ‘user’. Whenever it was essential to characterize the person in a health organizational context, the term ‘user(s)’ was chosen (items 1, 37, 41).
The expression ‘family maladjustment’ was changed to ‘family problem’ (item 3) and ‘when not intoxicated’ was changed to ‘when they are not under the influence of alcohol’ (item 21). In item 25, the expression ‘I feel angry’ was changed to ‘I get very irritated’ and in item 29 the expression ‘problems with drinking’ was changed to ‘problems with alcohol’. In item 30, the expression ‘they are to blame for their health problems’ was replaced with ‘they are responsible for their health problems’. Concerning this specific item, equivalence was not confirmed in the back-translation, but both the researchers, the Brazilian native speakers involved, and the author of the original instrument considered this last one to be the most appropriate expression.
The expression ‘psychologically disturbed people’ (item 35) was replaced with ‘people who suffer psychologically’. The back-translation confirmed the equivalence of this expression in relation to the original version, despite conveying a more positive orientation. The same occurred in item 42, where we replaced the original expression ‘difficult to relate to’ with ‘difficult to deal with’.
The S2 version, which resulted from the back-translations, was sent to the author of the original instrument. His only suggestion was to keep the term ‘user’ instead of ‘person’ in specific items of factor 1, as it specifically refers to professional interactions in healthcare contexts.
After the expert committee’s review, the concordance analysis showed an average of 4.80 (min 3.67–max 5) and the calculated CVI for each subsection was greater than 0.80: F1 = 0.95/F2 = 0.96/F3 = 0.95/F4 = 1.0 with a total scale value = 0.96 (S-CVI-scale content validity index). Experts made only minor suggestions that were included in the final version after being analyzed, and a consensus was reached by three researchers.
According to the pre-test, there was no need to change any questions, as clarity and comprehensibility were confirmed. Measures of central tendency and dispersion were analyzed to address variability in the responses and sensitivity of the items.
This study aimed to adapt the EAFAA from Brazilian Portuguese to Portuguese from Portugal (EAFAA-PT). Although the language is the same, there are phonetic, vocabulary, and syntax differences between the Brazilian and Portuguese variants. Furthermore, cultural differences between these countries require an adaptation that must be as rigorous as it would be for two completely different languages [10
]. The same happened when this instrument was adapted to Spanish [4
] and American English [6
The cross-cultural adaptation process led mainly to the reformulation of technical designations to those currently used in Portugal. Semantic equivalence (grammatical consistency of the terms used throughout the scale) and conceptual equivalence (adequacy of the concepts used in the Portuguese cultural context) were taken into consideration.
Representativeness, clarity, semantic equivalence, and conceptual equivalence were assessed for each item. In contrast to what was observed in previous validation studies of the EAFAA [4
], no suggestions for moving items to different factors or for their elimination were observed. This may be the result of the cultural and linguistic similarities between Portugal and Brazil.
The linguistic and cultural adaptation of the EAFAA was performed for the population of health professionals in Portugal. The EAFAA-PT achieved consensus regarding acceptability, comprehensibility, ease of completion, semantic equivalence, and content equivalence compared to the original version. We recommend a study on the psychometric properties of the EAFAA-PT.
Conceptualization, P.S., I.R.N., V.S. and D.d.V.; methodology, P.S., I.R.N. and V.S.; validation, P.S., I.R.N., V.S. and D.d.V.; formal analysis, P.S. and D.d.V.; investigation, P.S., I.R.N. and O.V.; writing—original draft preparation, P.S., V.S., I.R.N. and O.V.; writing—review and editing, P.S., V.S., I.R.N. and O.V.; visualization, P.S. and I.R.N.; supervision, P.S.; project administration, P.S. and O.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
This article was supported by National Funds through FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P.—within CINTESIS, R&D Unit (reference UIDB/4255/2020).
Institutional Review Board Statement
This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Lisbon and Tagus Valley Regional Health Administration, Portugal (1903/CES/2021), approved in 5/3/2022.
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to anonymity and confidentiality.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- World Health Organization. Global Status Report on Alcohol and health 2018; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/274603/9789241565639-eng.pdf (accessed on 29 June 2022).
- Serviço de Intervenção nos Comportamentos Aditivos e nas Dependências [SICAD]. Relatório anual 2020—A situação do país em matéria de álcool; SICAD: Lisboa, Portugal, 2021; Available online: https://www.sicad.pt/PT/Publicacoes/Paginas/detalhe.aspx?itemId=176&lista=SICAD_PUBLICACOES&bkUrl=BK/Publicacoes/ (accessed on 29 June 2022).
- De Vargas, D. Construct validation of the scale of attitudes toward alcohol, alcoholism and individuals with alcohol use disorders. Rev. Psiquiatr. Clin. 2014, 41, 106–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramírez, E.G.L.; De Vargas, D.; Heredia, L.P.D.; Corzo, A.S. Spanish version of the scale of attitudes toward alcohol, alcoholism and alcoholics: Content validation. Rev. Bras. Enferm. 2017, 70, 342–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Ramírez, E.G.L.; De Vargas, D. Scale of attitudes toward alcohol—Spanish version: Evidences of validity and reliability. Rev. Lat.-Am. Enferm. 2017, 25, e2918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Vargas, D.; Naegle, M.A. Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Content Validation of the Alcohol, Alcoholism, and Alcoholic Attitudes Scale–American English Version. J. Nurs. Meas. 2018, 26, 204–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Vargas, D.; Naegle, M.A. Attitudes Scale on Alcohol, Alcoholism, and Persons with Alcohol Use Disorders. J. Addict. Nurs. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pinto-Gouveia, J.; Ramalheira, C.; Robalo, M.; Borges, J.; Almeida, J. Inventário de expectativas e crenças pessoais acerca do álcool. Psiquiatr. Clínica 1993, 14, 147–163. [Google Scholar]
- Barroso, T.; Mendes, A.M.O.C.; Barbosa, A. Adaptação cultural e validação da versão portuguesa da Escala de Expectativas acerca do Álcool—versão adolescentes. Rev. Enferm Ref. 2012, III Série, 17–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosa, A.; Loureiro, L.; Sequeira, C. Literacia em saúde mental sobre depressão: Um estudo com adolescentes portugueses. Rev. Port Enferm Saúde Ment. 2019, 40–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaton, D.E.; Bombardier, C.; Guillemin, F.; Ferraz, M.B. Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine 2000, 25, 3186–3191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Yusoff, M.S.B. ABC of Content Validation and Content Validity Index Calculation. Educ. Med. J. 2019, 11, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marôco, J.P.; Campos, J.A.D.B.; Vinagre, M.D.G.; Pais-Ribeiro, J.L. Adaptação Transcultural Brasil-Portugal da Escala de Satisfação com o Suporte Social para Estudantes do Ensino Superior. Psicol. Reflex. Crit. 2014, 27, 247–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).