OBJECTIVE: This study examines the validity of the Asthma Specific Coping Scale. METHODS: Study samples were comprised of persons with drug-treated asthma (n=3464) drawn from the Drug Reimbursement Registry and asthma rehabilitation participants [brief (n=278) and comprehensive (n=316) intervention]. Data were collected by questionnaires. RESULTS: The expected structure of the six subscales (restricted lifestyle, hiding asthma, positive reappraisal, information seeking, ignoring asthma, and asthma worry) was supported. The Cronbach's alpha reliabilities of the subscales ranged from .63 to .84. Concurrent validity was supported by meaningful correlations between asthma coping scales and psychosocial resources, health-related quality of life, and general coping. The asthma coping scales discriminated between the intervention participants and the population-based sample. Four out of six subscales also showed sensitivity to change after rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Though further longitudinal studies are needed, this scale seems to be a promising instrument to be used in surveys and outcome studies.
OBJECTIVE: This study examines the validity of the Asthma Specific Coping Scale. METHODS: Study samples were comprised of persons with drug-treated asthma (n=3464) drawn from the Drug Reimbursement Registry and asthma rehabilitation participants [brief (n=278) and comprehensive (n=316) intervention]. Data were collected by questionnaires. RESULTS: The expected structure of the six subscales (restricted lifestyle, hiding asthma, positive reappraisal, information seeking, ignoring asthma, and asthma worry) was supported. The Cronbach's alpha reliabilities of the subscales ranged from .63 to .84. Concurrent validity was supported by meaningful correlations between asthma coping scales and psychosocial resources, health-related quality of life, and general coping. The asthma coping scales discriminated between the intervention participants and the population-based sample. Four out of six subscales also showed sensitivity to change after rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Though further longitudinal studies are needed, this scale seems to be a promising instrument to be used in surveys and outcome studies.
Authors: Beatriz González-Freire; Isabel Vázquez-Rodríguez; Pedro Marcos-Velázquez; Carlos González de la Cuesta Journal: J Clin Psychol Med Settings Date: 2010-09
Authors: Monique O M Van De Ven; Rutger C M E Engels; Susan M Sawyer; Roy Otten; Regina J J M Van Den Eijnden Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 4.147