电子工具日常生活满意度评估(EISA)的测试-重测可靠性:队列研究。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION American Journal of Occupational Therapy Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.5014/ajot.2023.050285
Abbas H Quamar, Mark R Schmeler, Michael McCue, Rory A Cooper, Mary R Goldberg, Carmen DiGiovine, Diane M Collins, Richard M Schein
{"title":"电子工具日常生活满意度评估(EISA)的测试-重测可靠性:队列研究。","authors":"Abbas H Quamar, Mark R Schmeler, Michael McCue, Rory A Cooper, Mary R Goldberg, Carmen DiGiovine, Diane M Collins, Richard M Schein","doi":"10.5014/ajot.2023.050285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Currently, no self-report instruments exist for assessing satisfaction with performing instrumental activities of daily living and occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices like accessible smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the Electronic Instrumental activities of daily living Satisfaction Assessment (EISA) self-report outcome tool.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Repeated-measures cohort study with a time frame of 7 to 21 days.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Multicity online recruitment at assistive technology clinics, nongovernmental organizations, advocacy and peer support groups for people with disabilities, and higher education institutions.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Eighty-four participants with disabilities, age 18 yr or older, with a mean age of 43.3 yr (range = 19-75 yr), and 57% female.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Not applicable.</p><p><strong>Outcomes and measures: </strong>The a priori study hypotheses were that the EISA test-retest reliability scores would be above the minimum acceptable level (Rs > .80) and that internal consistency would be good (Cronbach's α = .70-.90).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On the basis of the study data, the EISA, Version 1.0, demonstrated good test-retest reliability (Rs = .81) and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .88).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>The results of the test-retest reliability and internal consistency analyses provide good support for the EISA to be used in clinical settings. What This Article Adds: This article documents the reliability and internal consistency of, to our knowledge, the first-ever self-report instrument for assessing satisfaction with performance of everyday occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.</p>","PeriodicalId":48317,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Occupational Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10846415/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test-Retest Reliability of the Electronic Instrumental activities of daily living Satisfaction Assessment (EISA): A Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Abbas H Quamar, Mark R Schmeler, Michael McCue, Rory A Cooper, Mary R Goldberg, Carmen DiGiovine, Diane M Collins, Richard M Schein\",\"doi\":\"10.5014/ajot.2023.050285\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Currently, no self-report instruments exist for assessing satisfaction with performing instrumental activities of daily living and occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices like accessible smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the Electronic Instrumental activities of daily living Satisfaction Assessment (EISA) self-report outcome tool.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Repeated-measures cohort study with a time frame of 7 to 21 days.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Multicity online recruitment at assistive technology clinics, nongovernmental organizations, advocacy and peer support groups for people with disabilities, and higher education institutions.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Eighty-four participants with disabilities, age 18 yr or older, with a mean age of 43.3 yr (range = 19-75 yr), and 57% female.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Not applicable.</p><p><strong>Outcomes and measures: </strong>The a priori study hypotheses were that the EISA test-retest reliability scores would be above the minimum acceptable level (Rs > .80) and that internal consistency would be good (Cronbach's α = .70-.90).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On the basis of the study data, the EISA, Version 1.0, demonstrated good test-retest reliability (Rs = .81) and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .88).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>The results of the test-retest reliability and internal consistency analyses provide good support for the EISA to be used in clinical settings. What This Article Adds: This article documents the reliability and internal consistency of, to our knowledge, the first-ever self-report instrument for assessing satisfaction with performance of everyday occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Occupational Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10846415/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Occupational Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2023.050285\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Occupational Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2023.050285","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:目前,尚无自我报告工具用于评估残疾人使用无障碍智能手机、平板电脑、笔记本电脑和应用程序等联网辅助设备进行日常生活和职业工具性活动的满意度:评估电子日常生活工具满意度评估(EISA)自我报告结果工具的重测可靠性和内部一致性:设计:重复测量队列研究,时间范围为 7 至 21 天:地点:在辅助技术诊所、非政府组织、残疾人权益倡导和同伴支持团体以及高等教育机构进行多方在线招募:84名年龄在18岁以上的残疾人参与者,平均年龄为43.3岁(范围=19-75岁),57%为女性:不适用:研究的先验假设是 EISA 测试-再测信度得分高于最低可接受水平(Rs > .80),内部一致性良好(Cronbach's α = .70-.90):根据研究数据,1.0 版 EISA 显示出良好的重测信度(Rs = .81)和出色的内部一致性(Cronbach's α = .88):结论和相关性:测试重复可靠性和内部一致性分析的结果为在临床环境中使用 EISA 提供了很好的支持。本文的补充:据我们所知,本文记录了有史以来第一份自我报告工具的可靠性和内部一致性,该工具用于评估残疾人使用智能手机、平板电脑、笔记本电脑和应用程序等联网辅助设备从事日常职业的满意度。
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
Test-Retest Reliability of the Electronic Instrumental activities of daily living Satisfaction Assessment (EISA): A Cohort Study.

Importance: Currently, no self-report instruments exist for assessing satisfaction with performing instrumental activities of daily living and occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices like accessible smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.

Objective: To assess the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the Electronic Instrumental activities of daily living Satisfaction Assessment (EISA) self-report outcome tool.

Design: Repeated-measures cohort study with a time frame of 7 to 21 days.

Setting: Multicity online recruitment at assistive technology clinics, nongovernmental organizations, advocacy and peer support groups for people with disabilities, and higher education institutions.

Participants: Eighty-four participants with disabilities, age 18 yr or older, with a mean age of 43.3 yr (range = 19-75 yr), and 57% female.

Intervention: Not applicable.

Outcomes and measures: The a priori study hypotheses were that the EISA test-retest reliability scores would be above the minimum acceptable level (Rs > .80) and that internal consistency would be good (Cronbach's α = .70-.90).

Results: On the basis of the study data, the EISA, Version 1.0, demonstrated good test-retest reliability (Rs = .81) and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .88).

Conclusions and relevance: The results of the test-retest reliability and internal consistency analyses provide good support for the EISA to be used in clinical settings. What This Article Adds: This article documents the reliability and internal consistency of, to our knowledge, the first-ever self-report instrument for assessing satisfaction with performance of everyday occupations for people with disabilities using internet-connected assistive devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops, and apps.

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
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.30%
发文量
406
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) is an official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc. and is published 6 times per year. This peer reviewed journal focuses on research, practice, and health care issues in the field of occupational therapy. AOTA members receive 6 issues of AJOT per year and have online access to archived abstracts and full-text articles. Nonmembers may view abstracts online but must purchase full-text articles.
期刊最新文献
Educating the Educator: Applying a Growth Mindset Approach to Prepare Educators for Major Changes in Occupational Therapy Education. Predictive Factors of State Licensure Board Disciplinary Actions in Occupational Therapy. The Hand Accumulation aNd Dexterity FUnctional Limits-Shriners (HANDFULS): A New Clinically Feasible Measure of Hand Volume and In-Hand Manipulation for Children. Bimanual Arm Trainer Versus Traditional Occupational Therapy Services in Upper Extremity Function. Abortion Law Changes and Occupational Therapy Practice in the United States.
×
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