Dataset Information

Developing the Polish Educational Needs Assessment Tool (Pol-ENAT) in rheumatoid arthritis and systemic sclerosis: a cross-cultural validation study using Rasch analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To undertake cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the educational needs assessment tool (ENAT) for use with people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic sclerosis (SSc) in Poland.

Methods

The study involved two main phases: (1) cross-cultural adaptation of the ENAT from English into Polish and (2) Cross-cultural validation of Polish Educational Needs Assessment Tool (Pol-ENAT). The first phase followed an established process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. The second phase involved completion of the Pol-ENAT by patients and subjecting the data to Rasch analysis to assess the construct validity, unidimensionality, internal consistency and cross-cultural invariance.

Results

An adequate conceptual equivalence was achieved following the adaptation process. The dataset for validation comprised a total of 278 patients, 237 (85.3 %) of which were female. In each disease group (145, RA and 133, SSc), the 7 domains of the Pol-ENAT were found to fit the Rasch model, X (2)(df) = 16.953(14), p = 0.259 and 8.132(14), p = 0.882 for RA and SSc, respectively. Internal consistency of the Pol-ENAT was high (patient separation index = 0.85 and 0.89 for SSc and RA, respectively), and unidimensionality was confirmed. Cross-cultural differential item functioning (DIF) was detected in some subscales, and DIF-adjusted conversion tables were calibrated to enable cross-cultural comparison of data between Poland and the UK.

Conclusion

Using a standard process in cross-cultural adaptation, conceptual equivalence was achieved between the original (UK) ENAT and the adapted Pol-ENAT. Fit to the Rasch model, confirmed that the construct validity, unidimensionality and internal consistency of the ENAT have been preserved.

SUBMITTER: Sierakowska M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4349946 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAs the therapeutic landscape for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) continues to change, it is relevant to examine current treatment patterns among rheumatologists. The purpose of this study was to identify attitudes and practices of US rheumatologists with respect to RA.MethodsNine-hundred and one US-practicing rheumatologists were sent electronic invites (via email or fax) to participate in a case-vignette survey in April 2013. All respondents were currently practicing rheumatology and seeing at least one RA patient per week. The survey examined current attitudes, existing knowledge, management choices and perceived barriers in the management of RA. Data collection stopped once 125 responses were received.ResultsApproximately half of the 125 respondents were very familiar with current clinical practice guidelines for RA diagnosis and management. There was no consensus on which validated tools to use when assessing RA severity, with 54% using Physician Global Assessment and 34% using Disease Activity Score 28 at initial assessment. Most respondents (74%) used methotrexate (MTX) as initial therapy for a newly diagnosed RA patient. Eighty-six percent of respondents would add a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) when MTX alone could not control RA. There was no consensus on which treatment should be used when a TNFi is ineffective. The majority of respondents (66% of respondents) would prescribe TNFis indefinitely in patients with continued response. If a patient was in stable remission on MTX and a TNFi, respondents were most likely to maintain this regimen (53% of respondents); a notable minority (43%) would lower the MTX dose. When prescribing biologics, respondents were most concerned with infection; infection was considered a very significant barrier to biologic use. Although 98% of respondents indicated that they personally educate patients about RA, only 42% provide written material.ConclusionsThe lack of consistency in responses suggests that rheumatologists may benefit from continuing medical education on; clinical practice guidelines; the most recent evidence for management of patients in remission; the use of biologic agents after infection; and management of patients with RA and comorbidities.