Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8: psychometric evaluation

Abstract

Background Patient-centered care and evidence-based practice (EBP) are core competencies for health care professionals. The importance of EBP has led to an increase in research involving clinical outcomes; current recommendations emphasize collecting patient focused measures, thus increasing the need for psychometrically sound patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of health. Disablement has been identified as a valuable multi-dimensional construct for patient care. The Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8 (DPA SF-8) has been proposed as a tool to be used in the physically active population that assesses a physical summary component of health and a quality of life component however, further analysis is necessary to ensure the instrument is psychometrically sound. Methods Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted on the DPA SF-8 at each time point to ensure factor structure. Reliability of the scale and internal consistency of the subscales were assessed, and a minimal detectable change (MDC) calculated. Additionally, a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was also established, and invariance testing across three time points and groups was conducted. Results The CFAs at all three visits exceeded recommended model fit indices. The interclass correlation coefficient value (.924) calculated indicated excellent scale reliability and Cronbach’s alpha for subscales PHY and QOL were within recommend values. The MDC value calculated was 5.83 and the MCID for persistent injuries were 2 points and for acute injuries, 3 points. The DPA SF-8 was invariant across time and across subgroups. Conclusions The DPA SF-8 met CFA recommendations and criteria for multi-group and longitudinal invariance testing, which indicates the scale may be used to assess for differences between the groups or across time. Our overall analysis indicates the DPA SF-8 is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument to assess patient improvement in the physically active population.

Differences in health-related quality of life among patients after ankle injury

“…The survey was created from multiple, previously validated questionnaires (Tegner and Lysholm, 1985 ; Ware et al, 2001 ; Casanova et al, 2021 ) and inquired about demographic information, previous injury history and several markers of general health and quality of life. After providing their age, height and mass, participants were asked (yes/no) whether they had previously sustained a lower extremity injury to the ankle, knee, or both joints.…”

“…The SF-8, a norm-based, 8-item, generic measure that includes scale scores for eight health dimension and two summary scales, the physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS, respectively) was used to assess HRQoL. Higher SF-8 scores indicate better HRQoL, and reliability (test–retest and other forms) and validity (general healthy populations and clinical populations) analyses of the SF-8 have yielded favorable and psychometrically acceptable results (Ware et al, 2001 ; Casanova et al, 2021 ). Versions of the Short Form assessment tools have been used in previous orthopedic research investigating HRQoL in patients with lower extremity musculoskeletal conditions (Bost et al, 2007 ; Vincent et al, 2010 ; Arnold et al, 2011 ; Wright et al, 2017 ; Gupta et al, 2019 ).…”

Risk factors associated with loneliness among mexican-origin adults in southern Arizona

“…This dynamic partnership extended across the entire spectrum of the study, notably including the development of the Emotional Well-being Questionnaire. This questionnaire included adaptations (for language and local responsiveness) of the Social Support Inventory-Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease (SSI-ENRICHED) [44], the State Hope Scale (SHS) [45], the Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8) [46], and sociodemographics [43]. The dependent variable (i.e., loneliness) was measured using the following statement/question: I felt lonely during the past week; response categories scored 1 = less than 1 day, 2 = 1-2 days, 3 = 3-4 days, and 4 = 5-7 days.…”

Factors Associated with Depressive Symptoms among Mexican-Origin Adults in a Community Sample at the US Mexico Border Region

“…This questionnaire included a depressive symptom measure adapted from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-R 10; [7]). Other instruments included adaptions (for language and local responsiveness) of the State Hope Scale (SHS; [21]), the Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8; [22]), the Social Support Inventory-Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease (SSI-ENRICHED; [23]), and sociodemographics [20]. Questionnaires that specifically target sub-threshold levels of symptoms, which do not meet the diagnostic criteria, hold significance because individuals experiencing subthreshold depressive symptoms or minor depression still face impairment, a heightened risk of developing major depression, and are prone to suicidal behaviors [24].…”