Advertisement

Validation of the Chinese version of joint protection self-efficacy scale in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

  • Wen H. Zhao
  • Li X. Zhang
  • Chan X. Liu
  • Karin Niedermann
  • Han Z. Yang
  • Wen LuoEmail author
Original Article
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

To develop and validate the Chinese version of the Joint Protection Self-Efficacy Scale (CJP-SES) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in China.

Method

(1) Translation of the original German/English version JP-SES and cultural adaptation into the Chinese language; (2)Validation of the CJP-SES with the Chinese versions of the Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale-8 (ASES-8), the Laffrey Health Conception Scale (LHCS), 10-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions Scale (PEPPI-10), Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28) and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Instrument measurement included reliability testing, item generation, construct validity, test–retest reliability, and correlation with other measurements. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to determine construct validity and internal consistency. One hundred fifteen patients with RA were investigated.

Result

Finally, 105 RA patients were included in the analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated fit for a unidimensional model of the JP-SES. Additionally, the scale showed internal consistency (Cronbach’s α coefficient 0.922), kappa coefficient (0.653), and test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.94). Weak correlations with other scores for the other instruments, such as the Chinese version of ASES-8 (0.263) and PEPPI-10 (0.326). Correlation with duration (0.274), moderate correlation with BMI (− 0.438) and DAS-28 (− 0.493), and strong correlation with HAQ (− 0.644) were found in this research.

Conclusion

This is the first study to adapt and validate the JP-SES into Chinese for use in patients with RA. Our research showing that the CJP-SES has a good construct validity, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability. This scale can help doctors and nurses to assess the self-efficacy of patients with RA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: TJYY-YLS-036

Keywords

Joint protection Rheumatoid arthritis Self-efficacy Validation 

Abbreviations

RA

Rheumatoid arthritis

C-JP-SES

Chinese Joint Protection Self-Efficacy Scale

ASES-8

Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale-8

LHCS

Laffrey Health Conception Scale

PEPPI

Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions Scale

DAS-28

Disease Activity Score-28

HAQ

Health Assessment Questionnaire

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to all those who helped me during the writing of this thesis. I gratefully acknowledge the help of nursing professor in Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Ms. Xie Fei, who has offered valuable suggestions in the academic studies. I also owe a special debt of gratitude to all the doctors and nurses in Joint Surgery Department, from whose devoted teaching and enlightening lectures I have benefited a lot and academically prepared for the thesis.

Availability of data and material

No additional data are available.

Authors’ contribution

Huiwen Zhao has received research approval from Tianjin Hospital. Wen Luo has received the authorization of using the JP-SES in Chinese/China from Karin Niedermann. Wen Luo, Xiuli Zhang and Xiuli Liu translated the JP-SES into Chinese; Wen Luo and Karin Niedermann and revised the back-translated scale. Xiuli Zhang, Xiuchan Liu and Zihan Yang performed data collection from participants and data analysis.

Wen H Zhao1 and Li X Zhang wrote the manuscript under the supervision of Wen Luo and advised by Karin Niedermann.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

None.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent for publication

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Supplementary material

10067_2019_4510_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (299 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 299 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Jorge MT, Jean YR, Mare CH (1996) Rheumatic and musculoskelelal disease and impaired quality of life: a challenge for rheumatologists. J Rheumatal 23:1–3Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Jong Z, Vliet Vlieland TPM (2005) Safety of exercise in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumal 17:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cieza A, Geyh S, Chatterji S et al (2006) Identification of candidate categories of the international classification of functioning disability and health (ICF) for a generic ICF Core set based on regression modeling. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Riemsma RP, Taal E, Rasker JJ (2003) Group education for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and their partners. Arthritis Rheum 49:556–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ewert T, Fuessl M, Cieza A et al (2004) Identification of the most common patient problems in patients with chronic conditions using the icf checklist. J Rehabil Med 2:2–9Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lev EL (1997) Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy: applications to OGCOIogy. Sch Inq Nurs Pract 11:21–37Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychol Rev 84:191–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brosseau L, Wells GA, Tugwell P et al (2004) Ottawa panel evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for therapeutic exercises in the management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults. Phys Ther 84:934–972Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xuelin G (2010) Nursing guidance for the self-efficacy in patients with rheumatoid. Zhejiang Clinical Medical 1:100Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Niedermann K, Forster A, Ciurea A, Hammond A, Uebelhart D, de Bie R (2011) Development and psychometric properties of a joint protection self-efficacy scale. Scand J Occup Ther 18:143–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lorig K, Chastain RL, Ung E et al (1989) Development and evaluation of a scale to measure perceived self-efficacy in people with arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 32:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garratt et al (2014) Measurement properties of instruments assessing self-efficacy in patients with rheumatic diseases. Rheumatology 53:1161–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taal E, Rasker J, Wiegman O (1996) Patient education and self-management in the rheumatic diseases: a self-efficacy approach. Arthritis Care Res 9:229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Funovits J, Aletaha D, Bykerk V, Combe B, Dougados M, Emery P, Felson D, Hawker G, Hazes JM, Huizinga T, Kay J, Kvien TK, Smolen JS, Symmons D, Tak PP, Silman A (2010) The 2010 American College of Rheumatology / European league against rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis:methodological report phase I. Ann Rheum Dis 69:1589–1595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mahoney FI, Barthel DW (1965) Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J 14:61–65Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilcox S, Schoffman F, Dowda M et al (2014) Psychometric properties of the 8-item English arthritis self-efficacy scale in a diverse sample. Arthritis 385256:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lei G, Cuicui Z, Miaomiao L et al (2016) Reliability and validity of arthritis self-efficacy Scale-8 in application of patients with rheumatoid Arthritis. Chinese Gene Pract 19:3589–3592Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laffey SC (1986) Development of a health conception scale. Res Nurs Health 9:107–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yuhua H, Qirun Q (1997) Predictors of health promoting lifestyle for college students in Kaohsiung. Chin J Public Health 16:25–35Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maly RC, Frank JC, Marsball GN et al (1998) Perceived efficacy in patient-physician interactions (PEPPI): validation of an instrument in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 46:889–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Klooster PMT, Oostveen JCM, Zandbelt LC et al (2012) Further validation of the 5-item perceived efficacy in patient–physician interactions (PEPPI-5) scale in patients with osteoarthritis. Patient Educ Couns 87:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhao HW, Luo W, Maly RC et al (2016) Validation of the Chinese version 10-item perceived efficacy in patient–physician interactions scale in patients with osteoarthritis. Patient Prefer Adher 10:2189–2195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Prevoo MLL, Hof MA, Kuper HH et al (1995) Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 38:44–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG et al (1980) Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 23:137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Joreskog KG, Sörbom D, Du Toit S, Du Toit M (2001) LISREL 8: new statistical features. Scientific software international, LincolnwoodGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Browne MW, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, pp 136–162Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cronbach LJ (1951) Co-efficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Crotina JM (1993) What is co-efficient alpha? A examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology 78:98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lohr KN (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11:193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McGraw KO, Wong SP (1996) Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1:30–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sherer M, Maddox JE, Mercandante B, Prentice-Dunn S, Jacobs B, Robers RW (1982) The self-efficacy scale: construction and validation. Psychol Rep 51:663–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Maddux JE, Gosselin JT (2003) Self-efficacy. In: Leary MR, Tangney JP (eds) Handbook of self and identity. The Guilford Press, New York, pp 218–238Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wen H. Zhao
    • 1
  • Li X. Zhang
    • 2
  • Chan X. Liu
    • 3
  • Karin Niedermann
    • 4
  • Han Z. Yang
    • 5
  • Wen Luo
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Joint Department, The 2nd Ward of Joint SurgeryTianjin HospitalTianjinPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Joint Department, The 1st Ward of Joint SurgeryTianjin HospitalTianjinChina
  3. 3.Department of rheumatologyTianjin HospitalTianjinChina
  4. 4.Institut of Physiotherapy, School of Health ProfessionsZurich University of Applied Sciences ZHAWWinterthurSwitzerland
  5. 5.College of NursingTianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations