Dergiler / Gülhane Tıp Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 61 - Sayı: 2

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of “cardiac rehabilitation barriers scale”

Sayfa
59–63
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusions:KRES is a valid and consistent tool in evaluating barriers in CR in Turkish patients.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aims:Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) has shown to be an effective treatment, but the patient participation and referral rates are low both globally and in Turkey.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The translated version has been applied to 59 patients who have been referred to the Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation unit after acute myocardial infarction but could not attend the sessions or missed their sessions.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusions:KRES is a valid and consistent tool in evaluating barriers in CR in Turkish patients.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Aims:Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) has shown to be an effective treatment, but the patient participation and referral rates are low both globally and in Turkey. This study aims to translate and show the consistency and validity of ‘Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale’ in Turkish. Methods:Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale has been translated into Turkish as Kardiyak Rehabilitasyonda Engeller Skalası’ (KRES). The translated version has been applied to 59 patients who have been referred to the Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation unit after acute myocardial infarction but could not attend the sessions or missed their sessions. Results:In the statistical analyses, The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value was 0.668 and Barlett’s test was significant (p<0.001). In factor analysis, 5 factors were identified: The first factor reflects extrinsic limitations on the patients’ access. The second factor reflects problems about patients’ information about CR. The third factor is logistical problems. The fourth factor reflects the perceived need for CR. The fifth factor consists of only one item ‘other health problems prevent me from going’. Internal consistency of all subscales revealed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha ≥0.7). Conclusions:KRES is a valid and consistent tool in evaluating barriers in CR in Turkish patients.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

COŞKUN, Ö. K., YAĞCI, İ., GÖÇMEN, S., SAĞDIÇ, B. Ö. (2019). Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of “cardiac rehabilitation barriers scale”. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 61 - Sayı: 2, 59–63. https://ajindex.com/articles/162595

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Onat A, Karakoyun S, Akbas T, et al. [Turkish Adult Risk Factor survey 2014: Overall mortality and coronary disease incidence in Turkey’s geographic regions]. Turk Kardiyoloji Dernegi arsivi: Turk Kardiyoloji Derneginin yayin organidir. 2015;43(4):326-332
  2. McMahon SR, Ades PA, Thompson PD. The role of cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart disease. Trends in cardiovascular medicine. 2017;27(6):420-425
  3. Anderson L, Thompson DR, Oldridge N, et al. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2016(1):Cd001800
  4. Grace SL, Krepostman S, Brooks D, et al. Referral to and discharge from cardiac rehabilitation: key informant views on continuity of care. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice. 2006;12(2):155-163
  5. Shanmugasegaram S, Gagliese L, Oh P, et al. Psychometric validation of the cardiac rehabilitation barriers scale. Clinical rehabilitation. 2012;26(2):152-164
  6. Ghisi GL, Santos RZ, Schveitzer V, et al. Development and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale. Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia. 2012;98(4):344-351
  7. Baek S, Park HW, Lee Y, Grace SL, Kim WS. Translation, Cross-cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Korean-Language Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale (CRBS-K). Annals of rehabilitation medicine. 2017;41(5):858-867
  8. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M et al. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2005;8(2):94-104
  9. Kaiser HF. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and psychological measurement. 1960;20(1):141-151
  10. Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: sage; 2013
  11. Pesah E, Supervia M, Turk-Adawi K, Grace SL. A Review of Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery Around the World. Progress in cardiovascular diseases. 2017;60(2):267-280
  12. Soroush A, Heydarpour B, Komasi S, Saeidi M, Ezzati P. Barriers for the referral to outpatient cardiac rehabili tation: A predictive model including actual and perceived risk factors and perceived control. Annals of cardiac an -aesthesia. 2018;21(3):249-254
  13. Moghei M, Pesah E, Turk-Adawi K, et al. Funding sources and costs to deliver cardiac r