Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Psychometric Validation of the Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale in China: Instrument Validation Study.

The dramatic growth of digital health apps highlights an urgent need for rigorous usability evaluation tools. While the Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES) has gained validation, a Chinese version has not yet been developed and validated. This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the Health-ITUES into Chinese, customize it for both service consumers and professional health care providers, and evaluate its reliability and validity in the Chinese context. Following the Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-report measures, the Health-ITUES was meticulously translated and culturally adapted into Chinese version following 2 rounds of expert consultation. Subsequently, based on the SMART system, an intelligent and integrated older adult care model, the Chinese version of the Health-ITUES was customized into the care receiver version (Health-ITUES-R) and professional health care provider version (Health-ITUES-P). Older individuals and nurses participated in the validation testing conducted between December 2020 and February 2021, facilitated by the improvement of the COVID-19 pandemic and the timing preceding the Spring Festival, which ensured feasible recruitment and a sufficient sample size. In addition, the pandemic-driven increase in digital health app usage allowed us to assess usability in a relevant real-world health care setting. Content validity, internal consistency reliability, construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and criterion validity were used to evaluate the psychometric attributes of the Health-ITUES-R and Health-ITUES-P. A Chinese version of the Health-ITUES comprising 20 items across 4 dimensions was formulated, informing the customization of the Health-ITUES-R and Health-ITUES-P. In total, 110 and 124 eligible older adults and nurses validated the customized Health-ITUES-R and Health-ITUES-P, respectively. Both versions exhibited satisfactory content validity (content validity index of items=0.83-1.00; content validity index of scale=0.99) and adequate internal consistency reliability (Cronbach α and McDonald ω>0.80 for the overall scale; >0.75 for individual items). Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed a 4D structure with acceptable construct validity, as indicated by model fit indices. Both the Health-ITUES-R and Health-ITUES-P showed satisfactory convergent validity (average variance extracted [AVE] value>0.5, composite reliability value>0.7), except for a slightly lower AVE value (0.478) for the second dimension of the Health-ITUES-R. Discriminant validity was supported, with the square root of AVE values exceeding correlation coefficients and the Hetereotrait-Monotrait ratio below 0.85. Furthermore, Pearson correlation coefficients for the perceived usefulness dimension, perceived ease of use dimension, and overall scale of the Health-ITUES-R and patient acceptance questionnaire for mobile health application were 0.587, 0.647, and 0.743 (all P<.01), demonstrating a significant correlation. The Chinese version of the Health-ITUES can be used as a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the usability of digital health apps for both care receivers and professional health care providers in the Chinese context.