Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The Effective Consumer Scale (EC-17) measures the skills of musculoskeletal patients in managing their own healthcare. The objectives of this study were to translate the EC-17 into Dutch and to further evaluate its psychometric properties.
The EC-17 was translated and cognitively pretested following cross-cultural adaptation guidelines. Two hundred and thirty-eight outpatients (52 % response rate) with osteoarthritis or fibromyalgia completed the EC-17 along with other validated measures. Three weeks later, 101 patients completed the EC-17 again.
Confirmatory factor analysis supported the unidimensional structure of the scale. The items adequately fit the Rasch model and only one item demonstrated differential item functioning. Person reliability was high (0.92), but item difficulty levels tended to cluster around the middle of the scale, and measurement precision was highest for moderate and lower levels of skills. The scale demonstrated adequate test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.71), and correlations with other measures were largely as expected.
The results supported the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the EC-17, but suggest that the scale is best targeted at patients with relatively low levels of skills. Future studies should further examine its sensitivity to change in a clinical trial specifically aimed at improving effective consumer skills.
Mulligan, K., Newman, S. P., Taal, E., Hazes, M., & Rasker, J. J. (2005). The design and evaluation of psychoeducational/self-management interventions. Journal of Rheumatology, 32(12), 2470–2474. PubMed
Tugwell, P. S., Wilson, A. J., Brooks, P. M., Driedger, S. M., Gallois, C., O’Connor, A. M., et al. (2005). Attributes and skills of an effective musculoskeletal consumer. Journal of Rheumatology, 32(11), 2257–2261. PubMed
Kristjansson, E., Tugwell, P. S., Wilson, A. J., Brooks, P. M., Driedger, S. M., Gallois, C., et al. (2007). Development of the effective musculoskeletal consumer scale. Journal of Rheumatology, 34(6), 1392–1400. PubMed
Hak, T., van der Veer, K., & Jansen, H. (2008). The three-step test-interview (TSTI): An observation-based method for pretesting self-completion questionnaires. Survey Research Methods, 2(3), 143–150.
Maly, R. C., Frank, J. C., Marshall, G. N., DiMatteo, M. R., & Reuben, D. B. (1998). Perceived efficacy in patient-physician interactions (PEPPI): Validation of an instrument in older persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 46(7), 889–894. PubMed
ten Klooster, P. M., Oostveen, J. C. M., Zandbelt, L. C., Taal, E., Drossaert, C. H. C., Harmsen, E. J., et al. (2011). Further validation of the 5-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions (PEPPI-5) scale in patients with osteoarthritis. Patient Education and Counseling. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.07.017
Sherer, M., Maddox, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Robers, R. W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663–671. CrossRef
Aaronson, N. K., Muller, M., Cohen, P. D., Essink-Bot, M. L., Fekkes, M., Sanderman, R., et al. (1998). Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 health survey in community and chronic disease populations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51(11), 1055–1068. PubMedCrossRef
Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Dewey, J. E. (2000). How to score version 2 of the SF-36 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.
Jöreskog, K. G., Sörbom, D., Du Toit, S., & Du Toit, M. (2001). LISREL 8: New statistical features. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. CrossRef
Linacre, J. M. (2006). A user’s guide to WINSTEPS MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago IL: Winsteps.com.
Smith, R. M., Schumacker, R. E., & Bush, M. J. (1998). Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 2(1), 66–78. PubMed
Lai, J. S., Teresi, J., & Gershon, R. (2005). Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 28(3), 283–294. CrossRef
Reeve, B. B., & Fayers, P. (2005). Applying item response theory modelling for evaluating questionnaire item and scale properties. In P. M. Fayers & R. D. Hays (Eds.), Assessing quality of life in clinical trials: Methods and practice (pp. 55–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 30–46. CrossRef
Lohr, K. N. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11(3), 193. CrossRef
Clark, N. M., & Dodge, J. A. (1999). Exploring self-efficacy as a predictor of disease management. Health Education & Behavior, 26(1), 72–89. CrossRef
Gallant, M. P. (2003). The influence of social support on chronic illness self-management: A review and directions for research. Health Education & Behavior, 30(2), 170–195. CrossRef
Smith, M. Y., Winkel, G., Egert, J., Diaz-Wionczek, M., & DuHamel, K. N. (2006). Patient-physician communication in the context of persistent pain: Validation of a modified version of the patients’ perceived involvement in care scale. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 32(1), 71–81. PubMedCrossRef
Linacre, M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328.
- Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the Effective Consumer Scale (EC-17)
Peter M. ten Klooster
Johanna C. M. Oostveen
Etelka J. Harmsen
Peter S. Tugwell
Mart A. F. J. van de Laar
- Springer Netherlands