7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Chinesisation, adaptation and validation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool in critically ill patients: a cross-sectional observational study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To translate and adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx) into Chinese version (‘CPAx-Chi’), test the reliability and validity of CPAx-Chi, and verify the cut-off point for the diagnosis of intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW).

          Study design

          Cross-sectional observational study.

          Methods

          Forward and back translation, cross-cultural adaptation and pretesting of CPAx into CPAx-Chi were based on the Brislin model. Participants were recruited from the general ICU of five third-grade class-A hospitals in western China. Two hundred critically ill adult patients (median age: 53 years; 64% men) with duration of ICU stay ≥48 hours and Glasgow Coma Scale ≥11 were included in this study. Two researchers simultaneously and independently assessed eligible patients using the Medical Research Council Muscle Score (MRC-Score) and CPAx-Chi.

          Results

          The content validity index of items was 0.889. The content validity index of scale was 0.955. Taking the MRC-Score scale as standard, the criterion validity of CPAx-Chi was r=0.758 (p<0.001) for researcher A, and r=0.65 (p<0.001) for researcher B. Cronbach’s α was 0.939. The inter-rater reliability was 0.902 (p<0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of CPAx-Chi for diagnosing ICU-AW based on MRC-Score ≤48 were 0.899 (95% CI 0.862 to 1.025) and 0.874 (95% CI 0.824 to 0.925) for researcher B. The best cut-off point for CPAx-Chi for the diagnosis of ICU-AW was 31.5. The sensitivity was 87% and specificity was 77% for researcher A, whereas it was 0.621, 31.5, 75% and 87% for researcher B, respectively. The consistency was high when taking CPAx-Chi ≤31 and MRC-Score ≤48 as the cut-off points for the diagnosis of ICU-AW. Cohen’s kappa=0.845 (p=0.02) in researcher A and 0.839 (p=0.04) for researcher B.

          Conclusions

          CPAx-Chi demonstrated content validity, criterion-related validity and reliability. CPAx-Chi showed the best accuracy in assessment of patients at risk of ICU-AW with good sensitivity and specificity at a recommended cut-off of 31.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline.

            The diversity of the population worldwide suggests a great need for cross-culturally validated research instruments or scales. Researchers and clinicians must have access to reliable and valid measures of concepts of interest in their own cultures and languages to conduct cross-cultural research and/or provide quality patient care. Although there are well-established methodological approaches for translating, adapting and validating instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research, a great variation in the use of these approaches continues to prevail in the health care literature. Therefore, the objectives of this scholarly paper were to review published recommendations of cross-cultural validation of instruments and scales, and to propose and present a clear and user-friendly guideline for the translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for cross-cultural health care research. A review of highly recommended methodological approaches to translation, adaptation and cross-cultural validation of research instruments or scales was performed. Recommendations were summarized and incorporated into a seven-step guideline. Each one of the steps was described and key points were highlighted. Example of a project using the proposed steps of the guideline was fully described. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for cross-cultural research is very time-consuming and requires careful planning and the adoption of rigorous methodological approaches to derive a reliable and valid measure of the concept of interest in the target population. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e da validade

              Resumo Instrumentos de medida desempenham um importante papel na pesquisa, na prática clínica e na avaliação de saúde. Estudos sobre a qualidade desses instrumentos fornecem evidências de como as propriedades de medida foram avaliadas, auxiliando o pesquisador na escolha da melhor ferramenta para utilização. A confiabilidade e a validade são consideradas as principais propriedades de medida de tais instrumentos. Confiabilidade é a capacidade em reproduzir um resultado de forma consistente, no tempo e no espaço. Validade refere-se à propriedade de um instrumento medir exatamente o que se propõe. Neste artigo são apresentados, discutidos e exemplificados os principais critérios e testes estatísticos empregados na avaliação da confiabilidade (estabilidade, consistência interna e equivalência) e validade (conteúdo, critério e construto) de instrumentos. A avaliação das propriedades de medida de instrumentos é útil para subsidiar a seleção de instrumentos válidos e confiáveis, de modo a assegurar a qualidade dos resultados dos estudos.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                9 April 2021
                : 11
                : 4
                : e045550
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentIntensive Care Units , Lanzhou University First Affiliated Hospital , Lanzhou, China
                [2 ]departmentSchool of Nursing , Lanzhou University , Lanzhou, China
                [3 ]departmentIntensive care uinits , Lanzhou University First Affiliated Hospital , Lanzhou, China
                [4 ]departmentNursing Department , First People’s Hospital of Lanzhou City , Lanzhou, China
                [5 ]departmentNursing Department , Henan Provincial People’s Hospital , Zhengzhou, China
                [6 ]departmentNursing Department , Sichuan University West China Hospital , Chengdu, China
                [7 ]departmentEvidence-Based Medicine Center , Lanzhou University , Lanzhou, China
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Yuchen Wu; yuchen0723@ 123456126.com

                ZZ, GW, JG and HW are joint first authors.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1278-1698
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-045550
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045550
                8042994
                33837104
                38ceda73-df33-4b19-ac12-48ba6cccdef4
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 07 October 2020
                : 19 February 2021
                : 17 March 2021
                Categories
                Intensive Care
                1506
                1707
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                adult intensive & critical care,clinical trials
                Medicine
                adult intensive & critical care, clinical trials

                Comments

                Comment on this article