OBJECTIVE: The Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire (THQ) measures subjective tinnitus handicap in terms of emotional, social, and health impact (factor 1), hearing (factor 2), and perception of tinnitus (factor 3). A French version of the THQ was used with 178 tinnitus sufferers in ENT consultation. Internal validity was confirmed by correlations between (i) semigroups of items (Cronbach's alpha), (ii) item and total scores, and (iii) individual items, for each factor (Pearson's r), and was found to be strong (alpha = .90). All items (except 25 and 26) showed strong total-score correlations (.30 < or = r < or = .74). All factor 1 items intercorrelated strongly (.34 < or = r < or = .70). The factor 2 axis was coherent, with interitem correlations between .46 and .74, and its concurrent validation in strong factor 2 items correlations with hearing loss, if any (multiple linear regression: r = .67, p < .0001). Moreover, hearing-impaired (mean = 44.47 +/- 31.13) and normal-hearing (mean = 15.2 +/- 21.10) factor 2 scores were significantly different. CONCLUSION: As with the original THQ, factor 3 items were not strongly intercorrelated; moreover, items 25 and 26 failed to correlate with total score, suggesting that factor 3 is to be regarded with great caution.
OBJECTIVE: The Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire (THQ) measures subjective tinnitus handicap in terms of emotional, social, and health impact (factor 1), hearing (factor 2), and perception of tinnitus (factor 3). A French version of the THQ was used with 178 tinnitus sufferers in ENT consultation. Internal validity was confirmed by correlations between (i) semigroups of items (Cronbach's alpha), (ii) item and total scores, and (iii) individual items, for each factor (Pearson's r), and was found to be strong (alpha = .90). All items (except 25 and 26) showed strong total-score correlations (.30 < or = r < or = .74). All factor 1 items intercorrelated strongly (.34 < or = r < or = .70). The factor 2 axis was coherent, with interitem correlations between .46 and .74, and its concurrent validation in strong factor 2 items correlations with hearing loss, if any (multiple linear regression: r = .67, p < .0001). Moreover, hearing-impaired (mean = 44.47 +/- 31.13) and normal-hearing (mean = 15.2 +/- 21.10) factor 2 scores were significantly different. CONCLUSION: As with the original THQ, factor 3 items were not strongly intercorrelated; moreover, items 25 and 26 failed to correlate with total score, suggesting that factor 3 is to be regarded with great caution.