Volume 10, Issue 4 (Autumn 2021)                   J Occup Health Epidemiol 2021, 10(4): 217-223 | Back to browse issues page

‎ 10.52547/johe.10.4.217
‎ 20.1001.1.22518096.2021.10.4.1.6

XML Print

Original Article
The Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA-p) Scale in Patients with Positive Angiography
Zohreh Mordouei1 , Mahmood Sheikhfathollahi2 , Mohsen Rezaeian3 , Hasan Ahmadinia4 , Mohsen Mirzaei5 , Mohammad Safarian5 , Reza Vazirinejad * 6
1- MSc in Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
2- Assistant Prof., Dept. of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
3- Professor, Dept. of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Occupational Environmental Research Center, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
4- Assistant Prof., Dept. of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Occupational Environmental Research Center, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
5- Assistant Prof., Dept. of Cardiology Medicine, Medical School, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
6- Professor, Dept. of Social Medicine, Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran. , rvazirinejad@yahoo.co.uk
Article history
Received: 2021/04/28
Accepted: 2021/12/18
ePublished: 2022/02/26
Subject: Epidemiology
Abstract:   (1506 Views)

Background: Cardiovascular disease often leads to limitations in patient activities. Therefore, providing a valid and reliable tool to measure the level of participation and autonomy can be used for improving their health. This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Persian version of a participation and autonomy scale (IPA-p) in patients with positive angiography.
Materials and Methods: This psychometric properties assessment study was conducted recruiting 202 positive angiography patients referred to a cardiovascular diseases clinic in Rafsanjan in 2017. Ten experts were also recruited to help assess the face and content validity. Criterion validity of the scale was assessed by calculating the correlation of the two sets of scores collected from patients and their relatives. To compute the construct validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were performed. Scale reliability was also evaluated.
Results: The content validity index was 0.94. The correlation coefficient between the scores of the completed questionnaires by patients and their relatives ranged between 0.443 and 1.0. Exploratory factor analysis extracted 9 factors, explaining about 73% of the total variance of the scale. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the fitting of the model. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.962, the coefficient of Split-half was 0.825, the Intera-class correlation coefficient was 0.363, and the coefficient of Test-retest was 0.807.
Conclusion: Present findings the Persian version of the IPA scale to be a valid and reliable questionnaire for assessing participation and autonomy in patients with positive angiography. More investigation is recommended.

Keywords: Cardiovascular Diseases [MeSH], Validity [MeSH], Reliability [MeSH], Factor Analysis [MeSH]
Full-Text [PDF 328 kb]   (383 Downloads)    
References
1. 1. Yavari P. Epidemiological text book of prevalent diseases in Iran. (Non-communicable diseases; Vol 2). Tehran: Gap Publisher; 2018.
2. 2. Myung SK, Ju W, Cho B, Oh SW, Park SM, Koo BK, et al. Efficacy of vitamin and antioxidant supplements in prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta- analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2013; 346:f10. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
3. 3. Wang TC, Huang JL, Ho WC, Chiou AF. Effects of a supportive educational nursing care programme on fatigue and quality of life in patients with heart failure: A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2016; 15(2):157-67. [DOI] [PMID]
4. 4. Casserley C. Disability, sight impairment, and the law. Br J Ophthalmol 2006; 90(10):1220-2. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
5. 5. World Health Organization. Global Data on Visual Impairments 2010. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2012. [Report]
6. 6. World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps: A manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. (Published in accordance with resolution WHA29. 35 of the Twenty-ninth World Health Assembly May 1976). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1980. [Report]
7. 7. Bray N, Noyes J, Harris N, Edwards RT. Defining health-related quality of life for young wheelchair users: A qualitative health economics study. PLoS 2017; 12(6):e179269. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. 8. Collin C. Measurement of disability and handicap. In: Greenwood RJ, McMillan TM, Barnes MP, Ward CD. Handbook of Neurological Rehabilitation. 1st ed. Oxfordshire United Kingdom: Psychology Press; 2003.
9. 9. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, van den Bos GA, de Jong BA, de Groot IJ. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil 1999; 13(5):411-9. [DOI] [PMID]
10. 10. Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Fletcher GS. Clinical Epidemiology: The Essentials. [Dadgarmoghadam M, Janghorbani M, Nirumand SH, KHademrezaeian M, Sadeghihassanabadi A, Trans]. 1st ed. Tehran: Gap Nashr; 2015. p.56-60.
11. 11. Dixon JK. Factor Analysis. In: Kellar SP, Kelvin E, Editor. Munro's Statstical Methods for Health Care Research. 6th ed. Philadeiphia, United States: Lippincot Williams& Wilkins; 2012.
12. 12. Vazirinejad R, Joorian J, Taghavi MM, Lilley JM, Sayadi Anari AR. The Persian Version of a Participation Scale: Is It Valid and Reliable Enough for Use among Iranian Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. J Clin Neurol 2015; 11(2):157-63. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
13. 13. Lawshe CH. A Quantitative Approach to Content Validity. Perssonel Psychology 1975; 28(4):563-75. [DOI]
14. 14. Saraie H. An Introduction on Sampling in Research. 10th ed. Tehran: Samt Publish; 2017.
15. 15. Ghamarani A, Siadatian SH, Pishdad R. An Investigation of Validity and Reliability of Entrapment Scale in the Students of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Qom Univ Med Sci J 2014; 7(6):54-61. [Article]
16. 16. Brace N, Snelgar RS, Kemp R. SPSS for Psychologists. 5th ed. London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.
17. 17. Mohammadbeigi A, Mohammadsalehi N, Aligol M. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments and Types of Measurements in Health Applied Researches. J Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci 2015; 13(12):1153-70. [Article]
18. 18. Sharif Nia H, Ebadi A, Lehto RH, Mousavi B, Peyrovi H, Chan YH. Reliability and validity of the persian version of templer death anxiety scale-extended in veterans of Iran–Iraq warfare. Iran J Psychiatry Behav Sci 2014; 8(4):29-37. [PMID] [PMCID]
19. 19. Tabachnick BG, Fidle LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 7th ed. Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Pearson Education; 2019.
20. 20. Hall DE, Lynn JM, Altieri J, Segers VD, Conti D. Inter- intrajudge reliability of the stuttering severity instrument. J Fluency Disord 1987; 12(3):167-73. [DOI]
21. 21. Delshad MH, Hidarnia A, Niknam S. Psychometric measure continuous variables preventive behaviors of hepatitis B virus infection in health care workers. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci 2014; 23(109):71-82. [Article]
22. 22. Murano I, Asakawa Y, Mizukami M, Takihara J. Examination of the Validity of the Japanese Version of the IPA Questionnaire for the Evaluation of the Physical Activity of Diabetes Patients. Rigaku Roho Sci 2013; 28:101-4. [DOI]
23. 23. Karhula ME, Salminen AL, Hämäläinen PI, Ruutiainen J, Era P, Tolvanen A. Psychometric evaluation of the Finnish version of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire in persons with multiple sclerosis. Scand J Occup Ther 2017; 24(6):410-20. [DOI] [PMID]
24. 24. Plitcha Kellar S, Kelvin E. Munros Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. 6th ed. Philadelphia, United States: Lippincott Wiliams and Wikins; 2012. p.14-34.
25. 25. Ghaziani E, Krogh AG, Lund H. Developing a Danish version of the “Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire”. Scand J Occup Ther 2013; 20(3):190-200. [DOI] [PMID]
26. 26. Suttiwong J, Vongsirinavarat M, Vachalathiti R, Chaiyawat P. Impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: psychometric properties of the thai version. J Phys Ther Sci 2013; 25(7):769-74. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
27. 27. Hammar IO, Ekelund C, Wilhelmson K, Eklund K. Impact on Participation and Autonomy: Test of Validity and Reliability for Older Persons. Health Psychol Res 2014; 2(3):1825. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. 28. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, de Jong BA, van den Bos GA, de Groot IJ. Psychometric properties of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82(2):210-6. [DOI] [PMID]
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.