J Clin Neurol.  2015 Apr;11(2):157-163. 10.3988/jcn.2015.11.2.157.

The Persian Version of a Participation Scale: Is It Valid and Reliable Enough for Use among Iranian Patients with Multiple Sclerosis?

• Vazirinejad R
• Joorian J
• Taghavi MM
• Lilley JM
• Sayadi Anari AR

• KMID: 2242660
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3988/jcn.2015.11.2.157

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to determine the face and criterion validity, stability reliability, and internal consistency of the Persian version of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA-p) scale among Iranian people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
METHODS
Trained experts interviewed 364 MS patients and their relatives to assess the criterion validity, stability reliability, and internal consistency of the IPA-p scale. Ten specialists from different disciplines were also recruited to assess its face validity. A consent form was completed by the patients and their relatives. Internal consistency reliability was measured using Cronbach's alpha and stability reliability was assessed using interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The test-retest method was used to detect the reliability of the questioner. The study subjects completed the IPA-p scale on two occasions separated by an interval of 30-45 days. Study checklists were also used to assess the face validity, stability reliability, and internal consistency of the IPA-p scale.
RESULTS
About 50% of the respondents reported their perceived overall participation to be "good" or "very good" and 60% of the specialists rated the ability of the IPA-p scale to measure what it was designed for as "excellent." Spearman correlation coefficients were >0.8 for all but one IPA-p domain. Cronbach's alpha between the mean IPA-p scale scores achieved on two separate occasions ranged from 0.858 to 0.913. The highest and lowest internal consistencies belonged to the "social relationships" and "education and learning" domains, respectively. The test-retest ICCs for the nine domains were between 0.789 and 0.919, and all were significant at p<0.001.
CONCLUSIONS
The IPA-p questionnaire can be considered a valid and reliable instrument for assessing self-reported participation among Iranian MS patients.

Keyword

participation; MS; persian; IPA; quality of life

MeSH Terms

Checklist
Consent Forms
Surveys and Questionnaires
Humans
Multiple Sclerosis*
Quality of Life
Specialization

Reference

1. Compston A, Coles A. Multiple sclerosis. Lancet. 2002; 359:1221–1231.

2. Compston A, Ebers G, Lassmann H, McDonald I, Matthews B, Wekerle H. The story of multiple sclerosis. In : McAlpine D, Compston A, editors. McAlpine's Multiple Sclerosis. 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone;1998. p. 3–42.

3. Vazirinejad R, Lilley J, Ward C. A health profile of adults with multiple sclerosis living in the community. Mult Scler. 2008; 14:1099–1105.

4. Salerno DF, Franzblau A, Armstrong TJ, Werner RA, Becker MP. Test-retest reliability of the Upper Extremity Questionnaire among keyboard operators. Am J Ind Med. 2001; 40:655–666.

5. Vickrey BG, Hays RD, Harooni R, Myers LW, Ellison GW. A health-related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res. 1995; 4:187–206.

6. Wallander JL, Schmitt M, Koot HM. Quality of life measurement in children and adolescents: issues, instruments, and applications. J Clin Psychol. 2001; 57:571–585.

7. Marrie RA, Miller DM, Chelune GJ, Cohen JA. Validity and reliability of the MSQLI in cognitively impaired patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2003; 9:621–626.

8. Amato MP, Ponziani G, Pracucci G, Bracco L, Siracusa G, Amaducci L. Cognitive impairment in early-onset multiple sclerosis. Pattern, predictors, and impact on everyday life in a 4-year follow-up. Arch Neurol. 1995; 52:168–172.

9. Rao SM, Leo GJ, Bernardin L, Unverzagt F. Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. I. Frequency, patterns, and prediction. Neurology. 1991; 41:685–691.

10. Jenkinson C, Mant J, Carter J, Wade D, Winner S. The London handicap scale: a re-evaluation of its validity using standard scoring and simple summation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2000; 68:365–367.

11. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, van den Bos GA, de Jong BA, de Groot IJ. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil. 1999; 13:411–419.

12. World Health Organization. International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps: a manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease, published in accordance with resolution WHA29. In : 35 of the Twenty-ninth World Health Assembly; May 1976; Geneva: World Health Organization;1980.

13. Cardol M, de Jong BA, Ward CD. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation. In : Cardol M, editor. Beyond Disability. Assessing Participation and Autonomy in Medical Rehabilitation. Ridderkerk: Ridderprint;2001. p. 18.

14. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, de Jong BA, van den Bos GA, de Groot IJ. Psychometric properties of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 82:210–216.

15. Vazirinejad R, Lilley JM, Ward CD. The 'Impact on Participation and Autonomy': acceptability of the English version in a multiple sclerosis outpatient setting. Mult Scler. 2003; 9:612–615.

16. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951; 16:297–334.

17. Szklo M, Nieto FJ. Epidemiology: beyond the Basics. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen;2000.

18. Pasta DJ, Diana S. Creating scales from questionnaires: PROC VARCLUS vs. factor analysis. In : Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual SAS Users Group International Conference; 2004 May 9-12; Montreal. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.;2004.

19. Lee D, Newell R, Ziegler L, Topping A. Treatment of fatigue in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008; 14:81–93.

20. Kersten P, Sibley A, Ward CD, White B, George SL. The validity and reliability of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire. Clin Rehabil. 2005; 19:575–576.

21. Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther. 2005; 85:257–268.

22. Yorkston KM, Bamer A, Johnson K, Amtmann D. Satisfaction with participation in multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2012; 34:747–753.

23. Kierkegaard M, Einarsson U, Gottberg K, von Koch L, Holmqvist LW. The relationship between walking, manual dexterity, cognition and activity/participation in persons with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2012; 18:639–646.