Comparison of Psychometric Properties of the Original and Brief Version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia

M. Abedi, F. Okhovatian, A. Daryabor, A. Baghban
{"title":"Comparison of Psychometric Properties of the Original and Brief Version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia","authors":"M. Abedi, F. Okhovatian, A. Daryabor, A. Baghban","doi":"10.18502/jmr.v17i3.13067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Some accurate tools exist to assess fear-avoidance behavior, such as the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK) in individuals with musculoskeletal problems. The current research aims to compare the psychometric characteristics of the original Persian 17-items TSK questionnaire and its 11-item brief version in chronic non-specific low-back pain (CNSLBP). \nMaterials and Methods: In this test development study, 295 patients with CNSLBP referred to the physiotherapy clinic of Milad Hospital in Tehran city, Iran were evaluated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and α Cronbach was conducted to assess the validity and reliability of the original and brief Persian version of the TSK, respectively. For goodness-of-fit, the Χ2/df, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and comparative fit index (CFI) indices were used. \nResults: Internal consistency specified by Cronbach’s α was 0.949 for the original version of the questionnaire and 0.927 for the brief one. Based on the CFA findings, the goodness-of-fit indices for the brief version were GFI=0.921, RMSEA=0.078 (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.062%-0.094%), comparative fit index (CFI)=0.981, and Χ2/df=2.791. These indices for the original one were 0.882, 0.066 (90% CI, 0.055%-0.076%), 0.983, and 2.270, respectively.    A significant correlation was found between these two versions (P<0.001). These findings confirm the adequacy of the brief version of the TSK. \nConclusion: The brief Persian version of TSK can be considered a reliable and valid tool to evaluate somatic focus and activity avoidance in patients with CNSLBP.","PeriodicalId":34281,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmr.v17i3.13067","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Some accurate tools exist to assess fear-avoidance behavior, such as the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK) in individuals with musculoskeletal problems. The current research aims to compare the psychometric characteristics of the original Persian 17-items TSK questionnaire and its 11-item brief version in chronic non-specific low-back pain (CNSLBP). Materials and Methods: In this test development study, 295 patients with CNSLBP referred to the physiotherapy clinic of Milad Hospital in Tehran city, Iran were evaluated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and α Cronbach was conducted to assess the validity and reliability of the original and brief Persian version of the TSK, respectively. For goodness-of-fit, the Χ2/df, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and comparative fit index (CFI) indices were used. Results: Internal consistency specified by Cronbach’s α was 0.949 for the original version of the questionnaire and 0.927 for the brief one. Based on the CFA findings, the goodness-of-fit indices for the brief version were GFI=0.921, RMSEA=0.078 (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.062%-0.094%), comparative fit index (CFI)=0.981, and Χ2/df=2.791. These indices for the original one were 0.882, 0.066 (90% CI, 0.055%-0.076%), 0.983, and 2.270, respectively.    A significant correlation was found between these two versions (P<0.001). These findings confirm the adequacy of the brief version of the TSK. Conclusion: The brief Persian version of TSK can be considered a reliable and valid tool to evaluate somatic focus and activity avoidance in patients with CNSLBP.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
运动恐惧症Tampa量表原始版和简版心理测量特性的比较
引言:有一些准确的工具可以评估恐惧回避行为,例如肌肉骨骼问题患者的运动恐惧症坦帕量表(TSK)。本研究旨在比较波斯17项TSK问卷及其11项简明版在慢性非特异性腰痛(CNSLBP)中的心理测量特征。材料和方法:在这项测试开发研究中,对295名转诊至伊朗德黑兰市米拉德医院物理治疗诊所的CNSLBP患者进行了评估。分别进行了验证性因素分析(CFA)和αCronbach来评估TSK的原始和简短波斯语版本的有效性和可靠性。对于拟合优度,使用了?2/df、近似均方根误差(RMSEA)、拟合优度指数(GFI)和比较拟合指数(CFI)指数。结果:Cronbachα规定的内部一致性对于原始版本的问卷为0.949,对于简短版本的问卷则为0.927。根据CFA的结果,简短版本的拟合优度指数为GFI=0.921,RMSEA=0.078(90%置信区间(CI),0.062%-0.094%),比较拟合指数(CFI)=0.981,和?2/df=2.791。原始指数分别为0.882、0.066(90%CI,0.055%-0.076%)、0.983和2.270。这两个版本之间存在显著相关性(P<0.001)。这些发现证实了TSK简短版本的充分性。结论:简短的波斯语版TSK可被认为是评估CNSLBP患者躯体焦点和活动回避的可靠有效工具。
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
Journal of Modern Rehabilitation
Journal of Modern Rehabilitation Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Investigating the Impact of Semantic Operations on PersianSpeaking Aphasics: Further Evidence on the Localization View Investigating the Solutions for the Implementation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Combined Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation with Occupational Therapy Improves Activities of Daily Living in Traumatic Brain Injuries: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial Investigating the Predictive Factors of Life Balance in Mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy Dry Needling Effects of the Upper Trapezius Muscle on the Angles and Range of Motion of the Neck in Individuals with Forward Head Posture
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1