Journal List > Korean J Occup Environ Med > v.24(1) > 1125619

TOOLS
Jeon, Lee, and Kim: A Validation of the Korean Version of QEESI© (The Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory)
Original Article
Korean Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Korean Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2012; 24(1): 96-114.

Published online: 31 March 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.0000/kjoem.2012.24.1.96

A Validation of the Korean Version of QEESI© (The Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory)

Byoung-Hak Jeon, Se-Hoon Lee, Hyoung-Ah Kim

Department of Preventive Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea.

Corresponding author (ashlee@catholic.ac.kr)

Received 17 January 2012       Revised 15 March 2012       Accepted 15 March 2012

Copyright © 2012 The Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

A standardized questionnaire is not available for use as a screening tool to assess individuals with MCS/IEI in Korea. The QEESI©, originally developed by Miller & Prihoda in 1998, helps researchers, doctors, and their patients identify individuals with MCS/IEI. Therefore, this study was conducted in order to create a Korean version of the QEESI© and evaluate whether this Korean version could be used as an effective MCS/IEI screening tool in Korea.

Methods

The Korean version of the QEESI© was developed using a six-step approach: permission, forward translation, the first quality control, backward translation, cognitive debriefing and the second quality control, final proof reading. In order to collect data, we have done a sample survey in certain parts of Korea. A household was used as the sampling unit; we extracted random samples in each survey cluster and then interviewed two adults over 19 years of age living in each sampled household. A total of 300 subjects were recruited from the general population in local community. The factor structure in the Korean version of the QEESI was analyzed with 40 items on four sub-scales except for the 10 items in masking index using principal components analysis with Varimax rotation. A convergent validity test two sub-scales: chemical intolerance and symptom severity. We carefully compared the chemical intolerance with Nordin's chemical sensitivity scale and the symptom severity with Cho's subjective symptom score.

Results

The results showed that the 40 items on the four sub-scales,' chemical intolerances',' symptom severity', 'life impact', and 'other intolerances', were consistent with those reported for the US population by Miller and Prihoda. The convergent validity wes very good (r=0.4; p<0.001, r=0.5; p<0.001, respectively). A good internal consistency (Cronbach' α=0.86~0.96) and test-retest reliability (r=0.87~0.90) were found in all scales, except for the internal consistency in the masking index.

Conclusions

The Korean version QEESI© showed a good reliability and validity. It should be necessary to conduct a MCS/IEI study adopting Korean version QEESI©.

Keywords: The Korean version QEESI, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, MCS/IEI

References

1. Bartha L, Baumzweiger W, Buscher DS, Callender T, Dahl KA, Davidoff A, Donnay A, Edelson SB, Elson BD, Elliott E, Flayhan DP, Heuser G, Keyl PM, Kilburn KH, Gibson P, Jason LA, Krop J, Mazlen RD, McGill RG, McTamney J, Meggs WJ, Morton W, Nass M, Oliver LC, Panjwani DD, Plumlee LA, Rapp D, Shayevitz MB, Sherman J, Singer RM, Solomon A, Vodjani A, Woods JM, Zien G. Multiple chemical sensitivity: a 1999 consensus. Arch Environ Health. 1999. 54(3):147–149.
2. Sparks PJ, Daniell W, Black DW. Multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome: a clinical perspective II evaluation, diagnostic testing, treatment, and social consideration. J Occup Med. 1994. 36:731–737.
3. Ashford NA, Miller CS. Chapter 1: Chemical Exposures and Sensitive Populations. Chemical exposures: low levels and high stakes. 1998. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley;3–26.
4. Graveling RA, Pilkington A, George JPK. A review of multiple chemical sensitivity. Occup Environ Med. 1999. 56(2):73–85.
5. The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study. EPA Office of Research and Development. cited 20 January 2011. Available: http://www.epa.gov/OCEPAterms/mterms.html.
6. Cullen MR. The worker with multiple chemical sensitivities: an overview. Occup Med. 1987. 2:655–661.
7. Caress SM, Steinemann AC. A review of a two-phase population study of multiple chemical sensitivities. Environ Health Perspect. 2003. 111:1490–1497.
8. Manabe R, Kunugita N, Katoh T, Kuroda Y, Akiyama Y, Yamano Y, Uchiyama I, Arashidani K. Questionnaire survey of workers in specific buildings regarding multiple chemical sensitivity. Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2008. 63(4):717–723.
9. Organized in Collaboration by the International Programme on Chemical Safety (UNEP-ILO-WHO). the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG). the Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BGVV). the Federal Environmental Agency (UBA). Conclusions and recommendations of a workshop on multiple chemical sensitivities (MCS). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1996. 24:S188–S189.
10. Watanabe M, Tonori H, Aizawa Y. Multiple chemical sensitivity and idiopathic environmental intolerance (part one). Environ Health Prev Med. 2003. 7(6):264–272.
11. Watanabe M, Tonori H, Aizawa Y. Multiple chemical sensitivity and idiopathic environmental intolerance (part two). Environ Health Prev Med. 2003. 7(6):273–282.
12. Winder C. Mechanisms of multiple chemical sensitivity. Toxicol Lett. 2002. 123(1-3):85–97.
13. Joffres MR, Sampalli T, Fox RA. Physiologic and symptomatic responses to low-level substances in individuals with and without chemical sensitivities: a randomized controlled blinded pilot booth study. Environ Health Perspect. 2005. 113(9):1178–1183.
14. National Research Council. Rea WJ, Johnson AR, Ross GH, Butler JR, Fenyves EJ, Griffiths B, Laseter J, editors. Multiple Chemical Sensitivities: Addendum to Biologic Markers in Immunotoxicology. Considerations for the diagnosis of chemical sensitivity. 1992. cited 20 January 2011. Washington DC: The National Academy Press;169–192. Available: http://www.aehf.com/articles/A55.htm.
15. Miller CS, Prihoda TJ. The environment exposure and sensitivity inventory (EESI): a standardized approach for measuring chemical intolerances for research and clinical applications. Toxicol Ind Health. 1999. 15:370–385.
16. Miller CS, Prihoda TJ. A controlled comparison of symptoms and chemical intolerances reported by Gulf war veterans, implant recipients and persons with multiple chemical sensitivity. Toxicol Ind Health. 1999. 15:386–397.
17. Ishikawa S, Miyata M. Multiple chemical sensitivity-criteria and test methods for diagnosis. Allergology & Immunology. 1999. 6:990–998.
18. Nordin S, Andersson L. Evaluation of a swedish version of the quick environmental exposure and sensitivity inventory. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2010. 83:95–104.
19. Hojo S, Kumano H, Yoshino H, Kakuta K, Ishikawa S. Application of quick environment exposure sensitivity inventory (QEESI) for Japanese population: study of reliability and validity of the questionnaire. Toxicol Ind Health. 2003. 19:41–49.
20. Hojo S, Ishikawa S, Kumano H, Miyata M, Sakabe K. Clinical characteristics of physician-diagnosed patients with multiple chemical sensitivity in Japan. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2008. 211:682–689.
21. Manabe R, Kunugita N, Katoh T, Kuroda Y, Akiyama Y, Yamano Y, Uchiyama I, Arashidani K. Questionnaire survey of workers in specific buildings regarding multiple chemical sensitivity. Nippon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2008. 63:717–723.
22. Saito M, Kumano H, Yoshiuchi K, Kokubo N, Ohashi K, Yamamoto K, Shinohara N, Yanagisawa Y, Sakabe K, Miyata M, Ishikawa S, Kuboki T. Symptom profile of multiple chemical sensitivity in actual life. Psychosom Med. 2005. 67:318–325.
23. Vallerand RJ. Vers une methodologie de validation trans-culturelle de questionnaires psychologiques: Implications pour la recherche en langue francaise [Toward a methodology for the transcultural validation of psychological questionnaires: Implications for research in the French language]. Canadian Psychol. 1989. 30:662–680.
24. Kim SY, Hong MH. A study on developing minimum requirement guidelines for standard questionnaire translation, validation using Delphi method. J Korean Acad Fam Med. 2000. 21(4):457–470. (Korean).
25. Crisp J, Pelletire D, Duffidld C, Adams A, Nagy S. The Delphi Method. Nurs Res. 1997. 42(2):116–118.
26. Hwang IH. Research methods using questionnaires. J Korean Acad Fam Med. 1994. 15(1):39–45. (Korean).
27. Nordin S, Millqvist E, Löwhagen O, Bende M. The chemical sensitivity scale: psychometric properties and comparison with the noise sensitivity scale. J Environ Psychol. 2003. 23:359–367.
28. Cho SH, Kim SM, Kwon HJ, Yim YH, Lim HS. Development of an on site diagnostic tool to detect neuropsychiatric impairment due to chronic organic solvent exposure. Korean J Prev Med. 1993. 26(1):147–164. (Korean).
29. Seong TJ, Si KJ. Research methodology. 2010. Seoul: Hakjisa;163–211. (Korean).
30. Kang BK, Son CG, Lee KJ. Statistics for Teachers. 2005. Seoul: Teayeongbook;419–443. (Korean).
31. Hong JS, Park YS. Statistical analysis of survey data. 2007. Paju: Freeacademy;153–167. (Korean).
TOOLS
Similar articles