Cargando…

Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Ch...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Lina, Söderhamn, Ulrika, McCallum, Jacqueline, Ding, Xianfei, Gao, Han, Guo, Qiyun, Liu, Kun, Liu, Yanjin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5549914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28792975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792
_version_ 1783256045682950144
author Guo, Lina
Söderhamn, Ulrika
McCallum, Jacqueline
Ding, Xianfei
Gao, Han
Guo, Qiyun
Liu, Kun
Liu, Yanjin
author_facet Guo, Lina
Söderhamn, Ulrika
McCallum, Jacqueline
Ding, Xianfei
Gao, Han
Guo, Qiyun
Liu, Kun
Liu, Yanjin
author_sort Guo, Lina
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Chinese context. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to conduct this study. The sample consisted of 1152 older adults. Data were collected by a questionnaire including the Chinese version of SASE (SASE-CHI), the Chinese version of ASAS-R (ASAS-R-CHI) and the Exercise of Self-Care Agency scale (ESCA). Homogeneity and stability, content, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity and specificity were assessed. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha (α) of SASE-CHI was 0.89, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.15 to r = 0.81, and the test-retest correlation coefficient (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99–1.00; P<0.001). The Cronbach's α of ASAS-R-CHI was 0.78, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.20 to r = 0.65, and the test-retest ICC was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92–0.96; P<0.001). The content validity index (CVI) of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI was 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) confirmed a good construct validity of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI. The Pearson's rank correlation coefficients, as a measure of concurrent validity, between total score of SASE-CHI and ESCA and ASAS-R-CHI and ESCA were assessed to 0.65 (P<0.001) and 0.62 (P<0.001), respectively. Regarding ESCA as the criterion, the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve for the cut-point of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91–0.94) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80–0.86), respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between the two instruments. Each has its own characteristics, but SASE-CHI is more suitable for older adults. The key point is that the users can choose the most appropriate scale according to the specific situation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5549914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55499142017-08-15 Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults Guo, Lina Söderhamn, Ulrika McCallum, Jacqueline Ding, Xianfei Gao, Han Guo, Qiyun Liu, Kun Liu, Yanjin PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test and compare the reliability and validity, including sensitivity and specificity of the two self-care-related instruments, the Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly (SASE), and the Appraisal of Self-care Agency Scale-Revised (ASAS-R), among older adults in the Chinese context. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to conduct this study. The sample consisted of 1152 older adults. Data were collected by a questionnaire including the Chinese version of SASE (SASE-CHI), the Chinese version of ASAS-R (ASAS-R-CHI) and the Exercise of Self-Care Agency scale (ESCA). Homogeneity and stability, content, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity and specificity were assessed. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha (α) of SASE-CHI was 0.89, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.15 to r = 0.81, and the test-retest correlation coefficient (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99–1.00; P<0.001). The Cronbach's α of ASAS-R-CHI was 0.78, the item-to-total correlations ranged from r = 0.20 to r = 0.65, and the test-retest ICC was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92–0.96; P<0.001). The content validity index (CVI) of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI was 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) confirmed a good construct validity of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI. The Pearson's rank correlation coefficients, as a measure of concurrent validity, between total score of SASE-CHI and ESCA and ASAS-R-CHI and ESCA were assessed to 0.65 (P<0.001) and 0.62 (P<0.001), respectively. Regarding ESCA as the criterion, the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve for the cut-point of SASE-CHI and ASAS-R-CHI were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91–0.94) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80–0.86), respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between the two instruments. Each has its own characteristics, but SASE-CHI is more suitable for older adults. The key point is that the users can choose the most appropriate scale according to the specific situation. Public Library of Science 2017-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5549914/ /pubmed/28792975 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792 Text en © 2017 Guo et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Guo, Lina
Söderhamn, Ulrika
McCallum, Jacqueline
Ding, Xianfei
Gao, Han
Guo, Qiyun
Liu, Kun
Liu, Yanjin
Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title_full Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title_fullStr Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title_full_unstemmed Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title_short Testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older Chinese adults
title_sort testing and comparing two self-care-related instruments among older chinese adults
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5549914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28792975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182792
work_keys_str_mv AT guolina testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT soderhamnulrika testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT mccallumjacqueline testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT dingxianfei testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT gaohan testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT guoqiyun testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT liukun testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults
AT liuyanjin testingandcomparingtwoselfcarerelatedinstrumentsamongolderchineseadults