Mutsaers J-H A M, Pool-Goudzwaard A L, Ostelo R W J G, Peters R, Koes B W, Verhagen A P
Dept of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Avans Hogeschool, University of Applied Sciences, P.O. Box 90116, 4800 RA Breda, The Netherlands.
Dept of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Man Ther. 2014 Jun;19(3):208-14. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2013.12.004. Epub 2014 Jan 18.
This study aims to assess the reliability and validity of the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT) in neck pain patients. Three research goals were formulated. (1): to reexamine the factor structure of the PABS-PT, (2) to assess the test-retest reliability of the PABS-PT and (3) to determine the construct validity of the biomedical factor of the PABS-PT.
Manual therapists (n = 272) included in this study participated in an educational upgrade program for a professional masters' degree in the Netherlands and completed the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale and the PABS-PT. Principal Axis Factor analysis was performed and correlation coefficients were calculated. In addition, Bland and Altman plots and the smallest real difference were determined.
We performed factor analysis on 182 questionnaires and test-rest calculations on 73 questionnaires. The principal factor analysis confirmed the existing interpretable 2-factor model of a 'biomedical treatment orientation' and a 'behavioral treatment orientation'. Test-retest reliability was 'moderate' to 'good' and construct validity for the biomedical factor was 'moderate' to 'substantial'.
The PABS-PT shows a consistent factor structure and good test-retest reliability and construct validity. More research is needed to gain further insight in the interplay between implicit and explicit attitudes and the dynamics of the PABS-PT score across different body parts.
本研究旨在评估物理治疗师疼痛态度与信念量表(PABS-PT)在颈部疼痛患者中的信度和效度。制定了三个研究目标。(1):重新审视PABS-PT的因子结构,(2)评估PABS-PT的重测信度,(3)确定PABS-PT生物医学因子的结构效度。
本研究纳入的手法治疗师(n = 272)参与了荷兰专业硕士学位的教育升级项目,并完成了医疗服务提供者疼痛与损伤关系量表和PABS-PT。进行了主成分因子分析并计算了相关系数。此外,还确定了布兰德-奥特曼图和最小实际差异。
我们对182份问卷进行了因子分析,对73份问卷进行了重测计算。主因子分析证实了现有的可解释的两因子模型,即“生物医学治疗取向”和“行为治疗取向”。重测信度为“中等”至“良好”,生物医学因子的结构效度为“中等”至“较高”。
PABS-PT显示出一致的因子结构、良好的重测信度和结构效度。需要更多的研究来进一步了解内隐态度和外显态度之间的相互作用以及PABS-PT分数在不同身体部位的动态变化。