Objective: To determine content validity of the Muscle Power Sprint Test (MPST) and construct validity and reliability of the MPST, 10x5 Meter Sprint Test (10x5MST), slalom test and one stroke push test (1SPT) in wheelchair-using youth with spina bifida (SB). Design: Clinimetric study Setting: Rehabilitation centers, SB outpatient services, private practices Participants: A convenience sample of 53 children (5-19 years, 32 boys / 21 girls) with SB who use a manual wheelchair. Participants were recruited in the Netherlands through rehabilitation centers, SB outpatient services, pediatric physical therapists and the BOSK (Association of and by parents of children, adolescents and adults with a disability). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Construct validity of the the MPST was determined by comparing results with the arm-cranking Wingate Anaerobic test (WAnT) using paired t-tests and Pearson Correlation Coefficients, while content validity was assessed using time based criteria for anaerobic testing . Construct validity of the 10x5MST, slalom test and 1SPT was analyzed by hypothesis testing using Pearson Correlation Coefficients and Multiple Regression. For reliability, Intra Class Correlation coefficients (ICC) and smallest detectable changes (SDC) were calculated. Results: For the MPST, mean exercise time of four sprints was 28.1 sec. (±6.6 sec.). Correlations between the MPST and WAnT were high (r>0.72, p<0.01). Excellent correlations were found between the 10x5MST and slalom test (r=0.93, p<0.01), while correlations between the10x5MST or slalom test and MPST and 1SPT were moderate (r=-0.56- -0.70; r=0.56, p<0.01). The 1SPT was explained for 38% by wheelchair mass (Beta -0.489) and total upper muscle strength (Beta 0.420). All ICCs were excellent (ICC>0.95) but the SDCs varied widely. Conclusions: The MPST, 10x5MST and slalom test are valid and reliable tests in wheelchair-using youth with SB for measuring respectively anaerobic performance or agility. For the 1SPT, both validity and reliability are questionable.
Purpose: The Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) is a globally recognized and used nutritional screening, assessment, monitoring, and triaging tool. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the original English PG-SGA for the Japanese speaking populations and to assess its linguistic validity (i.e., comprehensibility, difficulty) and content validity, as perceived by Japanese patients and healthcare professionals. Methods: In accordance with methodology used in previous Dutch, Thai, German, and Norwegian PG-SGA studies, we followed the ten steps of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles of Good Practice for Translation and Cultural Adaptation for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. The study enrolled 50 patients and 50 healthcare professionals (HCPs) to evaluate the comprehensibility and difficulty of the translated and culturally adapted PG-SGA. The HCPs also evaluated the content validity of the translation. We evaluated each item and quantified scale indices for content validity (item content validity index (I-CVI), scale content validity index (S-CVI)), comprehensibility (item comprehensibility index (I-CI), scale comprehensibility index (S-CI)), and difficulty (item difficulty index (I-DI), scale difficulty index (S-DI)). Results: Patients evaluated the comprehensibility and difficulty of the patient component as excellent (S-CI = 0.97, S-DI = 0.96). The professionals rated the Japanese version of both components of the PG-SGA as very relevant (S-CVI = 0.94). The professionals evaluated the comprehensibility of the professional component as being acceptable (S-CI = 0.88) but difficult (S-DI = 0.69), based predominantly on items related to physical examination (I-DI = 0.33–0.67). Conclusion: The PG-SGA was systematically translated and culturally adapted for the Japanese setting according to the ISPOR process. The Japanese version of the PG-SGA was perceived as comprehensive, easy to use, and relevant. Perceived difficulty in professional components, specifically in the context of metabolic demand and physical examination, will require appropriate training for professionals in order to optimize implementation.
Objectives To assess the content validity and psychometric characteristics of the Knowledge about Older Patients Quiz (KOP‐Q), which measures nurses' knowledge regarding older hospitalized adults and their certainty regarding this knowledge. Design Cross‐sectional. Setting Content validity: general hospitals. Psychometric characteristics: nursing school and general hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants Content validity: 12 nurse specialists in geriatrics. Psychometric characteristics: 107 first‐year and 78 final‐year bachelor of nursing students, 148 registered nurses, and 20 nurse specialists in geriatrics. Measurements Content validity: The nurse specialists rated each item of the initial KOP‐Q (52 items) on relevance. Ratings were used to calculate Item‐Content Validity Index and average Scale‐Content Validity Index (S‐CVI/ave) scores. Items with insufficient content validity were removed. Psychometric characteristics: Ratings of students, nurses, and nurse specialists were used to test for different item functioning (DIF) and unidimensionality before item characteristics (discrimination and difficulty) were examined using Item Response Theory. Finally, norm references were calculated and nomological validity was assessed. Results Content validity: Forty‐three items remained after assessing content validity (S‐CVI/ave = 0.90). Psychometric characteristics: Of the 43 items, two demonstrating ceiling effects and 11 distorting ability estimates (DIF) were subsequently excluded. Item characteristics were assessed for the remaining 30 items, all of which demonstrated good discrimination and difficulty parameters. Knowledge was positively correlated with certainty about this knowledge. Conclusion The final 30‐item KOP‐Q is a valid, psychometrically sound, comprehensive instrument that can be used to assess the knowledge of nursing students, hospital nurses, and nurse specialists in geriatrics regarding older hospitalized adults. It can identify knowledge and certainty deficits for research purposes or serve as a tool in educational or quality improvement programs.
LINK