Reliability and validity of the online application of London Chest Activity of Daily Living scale in assessing dyspnea-related functional impairment in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.
Isabela Julia Cristiana Santos Silva, Graziele Besen Barbosa, Karoliny Dos Santos Isoppo, Manuela Karloh, Anamaria Fleig Mayer
{"title":"Reliability and validity of the online application of London Chest Activity of Daily Living scale in assessing dyspnea-related functional impairment in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.","authors":"Isabela Julia Cristiana Santos Silva, Graziele Besen Barbosa, Karoliny Dos Santos Isoppo, Manuela Karloh, Anamaria Fleig Mayer","doi":"10.1080/09638288.2024.2303366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the LCADL scale applied via online form in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Methodological study. After hospitalization for COVID-19 individuals completed the LCADL via online form at two separate times. They also answered the post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale (PCFS), dyspnea, fatigue, and health perception scales, modified Medical Research Council (MRCm), Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36). Hospitalization data were collected from the individual's medical record.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>104 individuals participated in the study (57 men, 45.2 ± 11.9 years). The LCADL showed moderately to high test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.73-0.86; <i>p</i> < 0.001), there was no difference in scores between test and retest (<i>p</i> > 0.05), the mean difference between the applications was smaller than the standard error of measurement and the internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach's α = 0.70-0.94). In addition, it demonstrated adequate construct validity, showing correlations with PCFS, dyspnea perception, fatigue and health scales, mMRC, SF-36, and length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The LCADL as percentage of the total score presented a significant floor effect (25%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LCADL applied online was reliable and valid for assessing limitations due to dyspnea in ADL in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.</p>","PeriodicalId":50575,"journal":{"name":"Disability and Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"5618-5623"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disability and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2024.2303366","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the LCADL scale applied via online form in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.
Methods: Methodological study. After hospitalization for COVID-19 individuals completed the LCADL via online form at two separate times. They also answered the post-COVID-19 Functional Status Scale (PCFS), dyspnea, fatigue, and health perception scales, modified Medical Research Council (MRCm), Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36). Hospitalization data were collected from the individual's medical record.
Results: 104 individuals participated in the study (57 men, 45.2 ± 11.9 years). The LCADL showed moderately to high test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.73-0.86; p < 0.001), there was no difference in scores between test and retest (p > 0.05), the mean difference between the applications was smaller than the standard error of measurement and the internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach's α = 0.70-0.94). In addition, it demonstrated adequate construct validity, showing correlations with PCFS, dyspnea perception, fatigue and health scales, mMRC, SF-36, and length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit (p < 0.05). The LCADL as percentage of the total score presented a significant floor effect (25%).
Conclusion: The LCADL applied online was reliable and valid for assessing limitations due to dyspnea in ADL in individuals after hospitalization for COVID-19.
期刊介绍：
Disability and Rehabilitation along with Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology are international multidisciplinary journals which seek to encourage a better understanding of all aspects of disability and to promote rehabilitation science, practice and policy aspects of the rehabilitation process.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
