METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional two-phase study was carried out to develop the scale. In phase 1, a preliminary parent-report measure questionnaire was developed in Bahasa Malaysia. Later, it was sent to four experts for content validity followed by face validity. In Phase 2, a total of 386 parents of pre-school children aged 4 to 6 years old, split into two samples, were involved in the field study for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
RESULT: Sample 1 was used to perform EFA to determine the factorial structure of the SDS. All items with a factor loading of >0.4 were included. Sample 2 was used to perform the CFA. RMSEA and CFI analysis showed that the SDS has a good fit and confirms the dimensional structure found via EFA. The final questionnaire consists of 15 items with a 4 factors' structure and has excellent internal consistency reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: The Screen Dependency Scale (SDS) is a reliable and valid questionnaire to detect screen dependency among pre-school children aged 4 to 6 years old in Malaysia.
BACKGROUND: Prosthesis should be donned and doffed few times during the day and night; thus, it is important to measure ease of donning and doffing.
STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study.
METHODS: The questionnaire was designed and evaluated by a group of experts. The final questionnaire was administered to 50 individuals with trans-tibial amputation. A test-retest study was also conducted on 20 amputees to assess the repeatability of questionnaire items.
RESULTS: The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire was developed and tested through a pilot study. Based on Kappa index, the questionnaire items showed correlation coefficients greater than 0.7, which indicate good reliability and repeatability. The majority of the participants had good hand dexterity (80%) and could perform all types of grasps. The mean satisfaction scores with donning and doffing were 69.9 and 81.4, respectively. Most of the respondents needed to don and doff the prosthesis 3.44 times per day. Based on a 7-point score, the total scores ranged between 3 and 7.
CONCLUSION: The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire items showed good psychometric properties. A scoring method was suggested based on the pilot sample, which requires further evaluation to be able to differentiate between more suspension types. A larger international multicenter evaluation is required in the future to measure the responsiveness of the scales. This questionnaire will be useful in the evaluation of the ability of amputees to don and doff a trans-tibial limb prosthesis. Clinical relevance Donning and doffing of prostheses are challenging tasks for many lower limb amputees. The prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire, on its own or combined with other prosthetic evaluation questionnaires, has the potential to help manufacturers, clinicians, and researchers gain knowledge and improve the donning and doffing qualities of prostheses.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study from 4 primary care clinics where 240 patients aged >60 years and their caregivers were enrolled. Patients were assigned to a nurse or a health care assistant (HCA) for 2 separate PFFS-M assessments administered by HCPs of the same profession, as well as by a doctor during the first visit (inter-rater reliability). Patients were also administered the Self-Assessed Report of Personal Capacity & Healthy Ageing (SEARCH) tool, a 40-item frailty index, by a research officer. The correlation between patients' PFFS-M scores and SEARCH tool scores determined convergent validity. Patients returned 1 week later for PFFS-M reassessment by the same HCPs (test-retest reliability). Caregivers completed the PFFS-M for the patient at both clinic visits. Classification cut-points for the PFFS-M were derived against frailty categories defined through the SEARCH tool.
RESULTS: The inter-rater (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.93)] and test-retest (ICC = 0.94 [95% CI, 0.92-0.95]) reliability between all raters was excellent, including by patients' education levels. The convergent validity was moderate (r = 0.637, p < 0.001), including for varying educational background. PFFS-M categories were identified as: 0-3, no frailty; 4-5, at risk of frailty; 6-8, mild frailty; 9-12, moderate frailty; and >13, severe frailty.
CONCLUSION: PFFS-M is a reliable and valid tool with frailty severity scores now established for use of this tool in primary care clinics.
METHOD: Six hundred children aged 9-11 and 424 of their parents completely answered the child or parent versions of the SCAS.
RESULTS: Results indicated that the internal reliability of subscales were moderate to adequate. Significant correlations between child and parent reports supported the measure's concurrent validity. Additionally, anxiety levels in this Malaysian sample were lower than among South-African children and higher than among their Western peers. There were both similarities and differences between symptom items reported as often or always experienced by Malaysian students and by children from other cultures. Confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence of the existence of five inter-correlated factors for anxiety disorders based on SCAS-C.
CONCLUSION: Although some of the instrument's psychometric properties deviated from those observed in some other countries, it nevertheless appears to be useful for assessing childhood anxiety symptoms in this country.