分级压缩袜粘附量表的开发和验证。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Phlebology Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1177/02683555231200109
Wen-Tao Yang, Hua-Liang Ren, Kai Zheng, Zhen-Yi Jin, Jia-Hao Wen, Sheng-Xing Wang, Wang-De Zhang, Chun-Min Li
{"title":"分级压缩袜粘附量表的开发和验证。","authors":"Wen-Tao Yang, Hua-Liang Ren, Kai Zheng, Zhen-Yi Jin, Jia-Hao Wen, Sheng-Xing Wang, Wang-De Zhang, Chun-Min Li","doi":"10.1177/02683555231200109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compression therapy with the use of graduated compression stockings (GCSs) is a common treatment strategy for chronic venous disease (CVD). However, there is no uniform and objective standard to assess adherence to the use of GCSs. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a GCS Compliance Scale (GCSAS) to fill gaps in internationally recognized comprehensive scales and provide a useful tool for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The items included in the GCSAS were based on a review of the literature and open-ended interviews with experts, who screened the initial items using an item-level content validity index. Then, pilot tests were conducted three times with 50 participants. After exclusion of redundant and cross-loading items by exploratory factor analysis, 290 subjects were recruited to evaluate the reliability and validity of the proposed GCSAS. Analyses included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, split-half reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final GCSAS consisted of 17 items and 5 dimensions. The results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that the variances of each factor explained were 22.03%, 14.85%, 14.74%, 14.16%, and 13.35%, and all 5 factors explained 79.13% of the variance among the 17 items. The factor loadings of all items were >0.7. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the indices were adequate. A significant positive correlation was found between the GCSAS and the Venous Insufficiency Epidemiological and Economic Study - Quality of Life questionnaire scores (r = 0.76, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.90, test-retest reliability was 0.81, and split-half reliability was 0.92.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The GCSAS showed good validity and reliability to assess compliance with the use of GCSs among patients with CVD.</p>","PeriodicalId":20139,"journal":{"name":"Phlebology","volume":" ","pages":"605-612"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and validation of a graduated compression stockings adherence scale.\",\"authors\":\"Wen-Tao Yang, Hua-Liang Ren, Kai Zheng, Zhen-Yi Jin, Jia-Hao Wen, Sheng-Xing Wang, Wang-De Zhang, Chun-Min Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02683555231200109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compression therapy with the use of graduated compression stockings (GCSs) is a common treatment strategy for chronic venous disease (CVD). However, there is no uniform and objective standard to assess adherence to the use of GCSs. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a GCS Compliance Scale (GCSAS) to fill gaps in internationally recognized comprehensive scales and provide a useful tool for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The items included in the GCSAS were based on a review of the literature and open-ended interviews with experts, who screened the initial items using an item-level content validity index. Then, pilot tests were conducted three times with 50 participants. After exclusion of redundant and cross-loading items by exploratory factor analysis, 290 subjects were recruited to evaluate the reliability and validity of the proposed GCSAS. Analyses included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, split-half reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final GCSAS consisted of 17 items and 5 dimensions. The results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that the variances of each factor explained were 22.03%, 14.85%, 14.74%, 14.16%, and 13.35%, and all 5 factors explained 79.13% of the variance among the 17 items. The factor loadings of all items were >0.7. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the indices were adequate. A significant positive correlation was found between the GCSAS and the Venous Insufficiency Epidemiological and Economic Study - Quality of Life questionnaire scores (r = 0.76, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.90, test-retest reliability was 0.81, and split-half reliability was 0.92.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The GCSAS showed good validity and reliability to assess compliance with the use of GCSs among patients with CVD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Phlebology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"605-612\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Phlebology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231200109\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phlebology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231200109","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:采用分级压迫袜(GCSs)进行压迫治疗是治疗慢性静脉病(CVD)的常用策略。然而,没有统一和客观的标准来评估GCS的使用依从性。本研究的目的是开发和验证GCS依从性量表(GCSAS),以填补国际公认的综合量表中的空白,并为未来的研究提供有用的工具。方法:纳入GCSAS的项目基于对文献的回顾和对专家的开放式访谈,专家使用项目水平的内容有效性指数筛选初始项目。然后,对50名参与者进行了三次试点测试。在通过探索性因素分析排除冗余和交叉负荷项目后,招募了290名受试者来评估所提出的GCSAS的可靠性和有效性。分析包括内部一致性、重测信度、分半信度、构念有效性、标准有效性、收敛有效性和判别有效性。结果:GCSAS共分为17个项目和5个维度。探索性因素分析结果表明,解释的各因素方差分别为22.03%、14.85%、14.74%、14.16%和13.35%,所有5个因素解释了17个项目间79.13%的方差。所有项目的因子负荷均大于0.7。验证性因素分析表明,这些指标是足够的。GCSAS与静脉功能不全流行病学和经济研究-生活质量问卷得分呈显著正相关(r=0.76,p<0.001)。Cronbachα系数为0.90,重测信度为0.81,分半信度为0.92。结论:GCSAS在评估CVD患者对GCSs使用依从性方面表现出良好的有效性和可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Development and validation of a graduated compression stockings adherence scale.

Objective: Compression therapy with the use of graduated compression stockings (GCSs) is a common treatment strategy for chronic venous disease (CVD). However, there is no uniform and objective standard to assess adherence to the use of GCSs. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a GCS Compliance Scale (GCSAS) to fill gaps in internationally recognized comprehensive scales and provide a useful tool for future research.

Methods: The items included in the GCSAS were based on a review of the literature and open-ended interviews with experts, who screened the initial items using an item-level content validity index. Then, pilot tests were conducted three times with 50 participants. After exclusion of redundant and cross-loading items by exploratory factor analysis, 290 subjects were recruited to evaluate the reliability and validity of the proposed GCSAS. Analyses included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, split-half reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Results: The final GCSAS consisted of 17 items and 5 dimensions. The results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that the variances of each factor explained were 22.03%, 14.85%, 14.74%, 14.16%, and 13.35%, and all 5 factors explained 79.13% of the variance among the 17 items. The factor loadings of all items were >0.7. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the indices were adequate. A significant positive correlation was found between the GCSAS and the Venous Insufficiency Epidemiological and Economic Study - Quality of Life questionnaire scores (r = 0.76, p < 0.001). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.90, test-retest reliability was 0.81, and split-half reliability was 0.92.

Conclusions: The GCSAS showed good validity and reliability to assess compliance with the use of GCSs among patients with CVD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Phlebology
Phlebology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The leading scientific journal devoted entirely to venous disease, Phlebology is the official journal of several international societies devoted to the subject. It publishes the results of high quality studies and reviews on any factor that may influence the outcome of patients with venous disease. This journal provides authoritative information about all aspects of diseases of the veins including up to the minute reviews, original articles, and short reports on the latest treatment procedures and patient outcomes to help medical practitioners, allied health professionals and scientists stay up-to-date on developments. Print ISSN: 0268-3555
期刊最新文献
Implementation of a varicose vein module added to Swedvasc, the Swedish National Registry for vascular surgery. Long-term results and predictors of failure after mechanochemical endovenous ablation in the treatment of primary great saphenous vein incompetence. Durability and efficacy of the ELVeS® Radial® 2ring slim fiber for multiple ablations. Punch grafting for the treatment of ulcerated atrophie blanche. Pigmentation of lower limbs: Contribution of haemosiderin and melanin in chronic venous insufficiency and related disorders.
×
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