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.

IF 2 4区医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Disability and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1080/09638288.2024.2303366

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":"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.","PeriodicalId":50575,"journal":{"name":"Disability and Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"5618-5623"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"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.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

在线应用伦敦胸科日常生活活动量表评估 COVID-19 住院患者呼吸困难相关功能障碍的可靠性和有效性。

目的：研究通过在线形式应用于 COVID-19 住院患者的 LCADL 量表的重测信度和建构效度：方法：方法学研究。在 COVID-19 住院治疗后，患者通过在线表格分两次完成 LCADL。他们还回答了 COVID-19 后功能状态量表 (PCFS)、呼吸困难量表、疲劳量表和健康感知量表、医学研究委员会 (MRCm)、简表健康调查 36 (SF-36)。住院数据从个人病历中收集：104 人参与了研究（57 名男性，45.2 ± 11.9 岁）。LCADL 的测试-再测可靠性为中高水平（ICC：0.73-0.86；P > 0.05），应用之间的平均差小于测量标准误差，内部一致性良好（Cronbach's α = 0.70-0.94）。此外，它与 PCFS、呼吸困难感知、疲劳和健康量表、mMRC、SF-36 和重症监护室住院时间（p 结论）之间也存在相关性，因此表现出足够的构建效度：在线使用 LCADL 评估 COVID-19 患者住院后因呼吸困难造成的日常活动能力限制是可靠有效的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Disability and Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

9.10%

发文量

415

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

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.