Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of an Instrument to Measure the Self-efficacy of Older Persons After Hip Surgery
Keywords:
self-efficacy scale, older persons with post-operative hip, cross-cultural translation of an instrument, instrument modification, psychometric propertiesAbstract
Self-efficacy is essential for symptom management and performing physical activities to achieve post-operative goals. Nevertheless, there is not an instrument for assessing postoperative self-efficacy in older persons after hip surgery in the Thai context. Therefore, this cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties study aimed to modify and evaluate an instrument to be suitable for measuring post-operative hip self-efficacy of older persons in Thailand. The participants were 116 older persons who underwent hip surgery. The development process included; 1) requesting permission to translate and modify the Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale; 2) instrument translation, translation review, and verifying cross-cultural equivalence; 3) instrument modification; 4) evaluation of content validity; 5) conducting a pilot study; 6) evaluation of construct validity using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis; and 7) assessment of the instrument’s reliability using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The results found that the modified instrument, the Post-Operative Hip Self-Efficacy Scale (PHOSE), was comprised of six items with a 10-level rating scale and was cross-culturally equivalent. The scale’s content validity (S-CVI/Ave) was 0.97 and the construct validity’s exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed two components: 1) symptom and emotional management and 2) physical activity. These components explained 98.65% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated that the confirmatory model fitted well with the empirical data with a likelihood ratio chi-square (CMIN) = 14.86, CMIN/DF = 1.86, degree of freedom (df) = 8, p = .53, goodness of fit index (GFI) = .98, and root mean residual (RMR) = .045. Additionally, the Cronbach’s alpha of the PHOSE was .96. Healthcare providers can use this scale to assess self-efficacy among orthopedic patients who have has hip surgery.
References
กรมกิจการผู้สูงอายุ. (2565). สถิติผู้สูงอายุ สัญชาติไทยและมีชื่ออยู่ในทะเบียนบ้าน มกราคม 2565. สืบค้นจาก https://www.dop.go.th/th/know/side/1/1/1159
กัลยา วานิชย์บัญชา. (2564). การวิเคราะห์สมการโครงสร้าง (SEM) ด้วย AMOS. กรุงเทพฯ: สามลดา.
โรงพยาบาลพุทธชินราช. (2563). รายงานผู้ป่วยที่เข้ารับการรักษาในหอผู้ป่วยออร์โธปิดิกส์ประจำปี. พิษณุโลก: โรงพยาบาลพุทธชินราช.
ปริยากร วังศรี. (2559). ผลของโปรแกรมการส่งเสริมการรับรู้สมรรถนะแห่งตนและพฤติกรรมในการควบคุมภาวะไตเสื่อมในผู้ป่วยเบาหวานชนิดที่ 2 (วิทยานิพนธ์ปริญญามหาบัณฑิตไม่ได้ตีพิมพ์). มหาวิทยาลัยคริสเตียน, นครปฐม.
สุจิตรา เทียนสวัสดิ์. (2562). การพัฒนาเครื่องมือวิจัยสำหรับการวิจัยทางการพยาบาล. เชียงใหม่: บริษัท สยามพิมพ์นานา จำกัด.
ศิริพร ชุดเจือจีน, ประไพพิศ สิงหเสม, และสุดารัตน์ วุฒิศักดิ์ไพศาล. (2560). ผลของโปรแกรมส่งเสริมการรับรู้สมรรถนะแห่งตนในการเสริมสร้างทักษะชีวิตต่อพฤติกรรมสุขภาพทางเพศของนักเรียน. วารสารเครือข่ายวิทยาลัยพยาบาลภาคและสาธารณสุขภาคใต้, 4(2), 268-280.
อาศิส อุนนะนันทน์. (2562). ตำรากระดูกข้อสะโพกหักในผู้สูงอายุ. กรุงเทพ: บริษัท พี เอ ลีฟวิ่งจำกัด.
American college of surgeons. (2019). PHTLS prehospital trauma life support (9th ed.). Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.
Bujang, M. A., Omar, E. D., & Baharum, N. K. (2018). A review of sample size determination for Cronbach’s alpha test: A simple guide for researchers. Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, 25(6), 85–99.
Borgiani, E., Figge, C., Kruck, B., Willie, B., Duda, G. N., & Checa, S. (2019). Age-related changes in the mechanical regulation of bone healing are explained by altered cellular mechanoresponse. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 34(10), 1923–1937.
Clark, D., Nakamura, M., Miclau, T., & Marcucio, R. (2019). Effect of aging on fracture healing. Current Osteoporosis Reports, 15(6), 601–608.
DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development theory and applications (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Enge Júnior, D. J., Castro, A. D. A., Fonseca, E. K. U. N., Baptista, E., Padial, M. B., & Rosemberg, L. A. (2020). Main complications of hip arthroplasty: A pictorial essay. Radiologia Brasileira, 53(1), 56–62.
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417-1432.
Hair, Jr., J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (8th ed.). Andover, Hampshire, UK: Cengage Learning.
Lorig, K. R., & Holman, H. R. (2003). Self-management education: History, definition, outcomes, and mechanism. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 26(1), 1-7.
Lorig, K. R., Sobel, D. S., Ritter, P. L., Laurent, D., & Hobbs, M. (2001). Effect of a self-management program on patients with chronic disease. Effective Clinical Practice, 4(6), 256-262.
Mohamad, M. M., Sulaiman, N. L., Sern, L. C., & Salleh, K. M. (2015). Measurement of the validity and reliability of research instruments. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Science, 204, 164-171.
Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2020). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (11th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Prompuk, B., Lertwatthanawilat, W., Wonghongkul, T., Sucamvang, K., & Bunmaprasert, T. (2018). Self-management among adults with chronic low back pain: A causal model. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research, 22(3), 223-236.
Stanford Patient Education Research Center. (2007). Chronic disease self-management program questionnaire code book. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University.
Song, Y., (2009). The formation and test of hemodialysis self-management instrument (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung.
Templeton, H. R. M., & Coates, V. E. (2001). Adaptation of an instrument to measure the informational needs of men with prostate cancer. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(3), 357-364.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2015). World report on aging and health. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/186463
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Health and Nursing Education

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The published articles are copyrighted by Journal of Health and Nursing Education.
The statements that appear in each article in this academic journal are the personal opinions of each author and are not related to the editorial team of the Journal of Health and Nursing Education or Boromarajonani College of Nursing, Nakhon Ratchasima.
Responsibility for all elements of each article belongs to the individual author. If there is any mistake each author is solely responsible for his or her own article.