Dataset Information

Reliability and validity of the novel self-reported spine functional scale (SSFS) in healthy participants.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To develop the novel self-reported spine functional scale (SSFS) and conduct reliability and validity analysis, so that the public can better understand their own spine function in a more simple and scientific way, so as to effectively prevent spinal disorders and improve the quality of life through targeted rehabilitation therapeutic measures.

Methods

This study was approved by an institutional review board, and all subjects gave informed consent to participate.

Results

(1) Using Spearman correlation analysis to evaluate the content validity, each item was significantly correlated with the total score, and the project design was reasonable. The exploratory factor analysis method is used to evaluate the structural validity of the scale, and the standing position and the lying position of the posture evaluation can be attributed to the factor 2, which is called posture evaluation: the cervical flexor strength, the flat support, the prone back, and the supine knee. The back arch of the wall and the angel on the wall is attributed to factor 1, called the overall spine function test, and the cumulative contribution rate of the two factors was 46.057%. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the two-factor model fits well (χ²/df = 2.440, RMSEA = 0.04 < 0.05, GFI = 0.945, AGFI = 0.920, CFI = 0.967, IFI = 0.967, TLI = 0.951, GFI, AGFI, CFI, IFI, and TLI are > 0.90) and the validity is ideal. (2) The test-retest reliability shows that the test-retest reliability of each entry, each dimension, and the total score is greater than 0.5, and the test-retest reliability is high. The Cronbach α coefficient was used to evaluate the overall internal consistency of the scale, α > 0.70, indicating that the scale has high reliability. After deleting each item one by one, the α coefficient is 0.692-0.717, and there is no significant increase. (3) Sex and occupation did not affect the level of spinal function (P > 0.05), and there was interaction. Different BMI levels significantly affected the score of spinal function (P < 0.05). The rate of spinal dysfunction in overweight and obese subjects was significantly higher than the normal group; the overall score of spinal function was worse than the normal group.

Discussion

The reliability and validity analyses of this study verified the reliability and scientificity of SSFS in the young healthy population. Body weight had a significant influence on SSFS score, and the performance levels were different for the two sexes.

Conclusion

The novel Self-Reported Spine Functional Scale (SSFS) has high reliability and validity and is applicable to the self-assessment and maintenance of spinal health and the prevention of related spinal disorders in the young healthy population. Body weight has a significant influence on the SSFS score in healthy young people. Overweight and obese males were found to be more likely to have spinal dysfunction, while underweight males displayed poor cervical flexor muscle strength. Underweight females were found to have better overall spinal function and stronger cervical flexor muscle strength.

SUBMITTER: Li W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8386065 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study designMulticenter validation study.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to translate and adapt the AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma) into English, and test its psychometric properties among North-American spine trauma patients.Summary of background dataIn the absence of an outcome instrument specifically designed and validated for traumatic spinal column injury patients, it is difficult to measure the effect size of various treatment options. The AOSpine Knowledge Forum Trauma initiated a project and developed the AOSpine PROST consisting of 19 items.MethodsPatients were recruited from two level-1 North-American trauma centers. For concurrent validity, next to AOSpine PROST also 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) was filled out by patients. Patient characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Floor and ceiling effects as well as the number of inapplicable and missing questions were analyzed for content validity. Cronbach α and item-total correlation coefficients (ITCCs) were calculated for internal consistency. Spearman correlation tests were performed within AOSpine PROST items and in correlation to SF-36. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Factor analysis was performed to explore any dimensions within AOSpine PROST.ResultsThe AOSpine PROST was translated adapted into English using established guidelines. Of 196 enrolled patients, 162 (82.7%) met the inclusion criteria and provided sufficient data. Content validity showed good results, and no floor and ceiling effects were seen. The internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach α = 0.97; ITCC 0.50-0.90) as well as test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.97). Spearman correlations were good (0.29-0.85). The strongest correlations of AOSpine PROST with SF-36 were seen with the physical components (0.69-0.82; P < 0.001). Factor analysis revealed two possible dimensions (Eigen values >1), explaining 75.7% of variance.ConclusionThe English version of AOSpine PROST showed very good validity and reliability. It is considered as a valuable tool, and has the potential to contribute to the reduction of ongoing controversies in spine trauma care.Level of evidence2.

Project description:Background:With the rapid increase in ageing population, China is confronted with the daunting challenge of a growing number of patients with neurocognitive disorders (NCDs). This trend makes the maintenance of self-health and early intervention essential, highlighting the need for a tool that assesses self-efficacy of older adults in maintaining brain health or cognitive function. Aim:This study aimed to design the Brain Health Self-Efficacy Scale (BHSES) to measure elderly individuals' attitudes to NCDs, motivations and future plans for controlling risks. The psychometric properties of BHSES have been validated. Methods:Based on the current literature and relevant models, a 19-item scale was created during the first stage. A total of 660 older adults in the Yinhang community of Shanghai were included. The statistical approaches of item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), criterion-related validity and reliability test were used to evaluate the quality of BHSES. In addition, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) were used as criteria to test the criterion-related validity. Results:To test item differentiation, the study adopted item analysis and excluded item 8. Selecting a random half of the sample for EFA, the BHSES was refined to 16 items, which were categorised into the following three dimensions: 'memory belief efficacy', 'self-care efficacy' and 'future planning efficacy'. These were highly consistent with the hypothesis model. Its cumulative variance contribution rate reached 61.14%, with factor loads of all items above 0.5. The three-factor model was confirmed by the remaining data through CFA. All fit indices reached the acceptable level (?2=3.045, Goodness of Fit Index=0.898, adjusted Goodness of Fit Index=0.863, Comparative Fit Index=0.916, Incremental Fit Index=0.917, Tucker-Lewis Index=0.900, root mean square error of approximation=0.079 and root mean residual=0.068). The GDS and SAS scores revealed significant correlations with the BHSES score, indicating a high criterion-related validity. The overall Cronbach's ? coefficient was 0.793, with the ? coefficients' distribution of subdimensions ranging from 0.748 to 0.883. Conclusions:The 16-item, self-compiled BHSES is a reliable and valid measurement. It could help identify older adults with potential risks for developing NCDs or with high suspicion of cognitive impairment onset in recent periods and also offer insight into tracking brain health self-efficacy in association with cognition status.

Project description:BackgroundThe Functional Internal Rotation Scale is an excellent clinical tool for evaluating patients with shoulder arthroplasty, but it has not been adapted to the Thai version. The objectives of this study were to translate the English version and culturally adapt the Functional Internal Rotation Scale to the Thai version and to examine the psychometric properties of the Thai Functional Internal Rotation Scale among Thai participants having shoulder arthroplasty.MethodsThe Functional Internal Rotation Scale was translated to Thai, including cross-cultural adaptations, following standard guidelines. Psychometric properties were evaluated with shoulder arthroplasty patients. Content validity was evaluated using the content validity index (CVI). Criterion validity was assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. An Independent t-test was used to evaluate construct validity. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine test-retest reliability over a 14-day interval.ResultsOf 45 participants, 20 total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) patients and 25 reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) patients, the majority of participants were female (69%) and retired (91%) with a mean age of 72.9 years (SD 9.1). CVI evaluation was acceptable, with a total CVI of 0.92. The correlation of the Thai Functional Internal Rotation Scale with the Thai version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (Thai ASES) and the internal rotation subscale (IR subscale) of the Thai ASES was 0.73 (P < 0.001) and 0.75 (P < 0.001), respectively. For construct validity, TSA patients scored, on average, 10.8 points higher than RSA patients (43.7 vs. 32.9, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval 6.3-15.3). Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the Thai Functional Internal Rotation Scale was 0.95. The test-retest reliability revealed excellent reliability (ICC 0.99).ConclusionThe Thai Functional Internal Rotation Scale has good validity and excellent reliability in assessing internal rotation function in Thai shoulder arthroplasty patients.