OBJECTIVE: this study aimed to perform a comprehensive validation of the 16-item and 7-item Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) by investigating the overall structure and measurement properties, convergent and predictive validity and responsiveness to change. METHOD: five hundred community-dwelling older people (70-90 years) were assessed on the FES-I in conjunction with demographic, physiological and neuropsychological measures at baseline and at 12 months. Falls were monitored monthly and fear of falling every 3 months. RESULTS: the overall structure and measurement properties of both FES-I scales, as evaluated with item response theory, were good. Discriminative ability on physiological and neuropsychological measures indicated excellent validity, both at baseline (n = 500, convergent validity) and at 1-year follow-up (n = 463, predictive validity). The longitudinal follow-up suggested that FES-I scores increased over time regardless of any fall event, with a trend for a stronger increase in FES-I scores when a person suffered multiple falls in a 3-month period. Additionally, using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, cut-points were defined to differentiate between lower and higher levels of concern. CONCLUSIONS: the current study builds on the previously established psychometric properties of the FES-I. Both scales have acceptable structures, good validity and reliability and can be recommended for research and clinical purposes. Future studies should explore the FES-I's responsiveness to change during intervention studies and confirm suggested cut-points in other settings, larger samples and across different cultures.
OBJECTIVE: this study aimed to perform a comprehensive validation of the 16-item and 7-item Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) by investigating the overall structure and measurement properties, convergent and predictive validity and responsiveness to change. METHOD: five hundred community-dwelling older people (70-90 years) were assessed on the FES-I in conjunction with demographic, physiological and neuropsychological measures at baseline and at 12 months. Falls were monitored monthly and fear of falling every 3 months. RESULTS: the overall structure and measurement properties of both FES-I scales, as evaluated with item response theory, were good. Discriminative ability on physiological and neuropsychological measures indicated excellent validity, both at baseline (n = 500, convergent validity) and at 1-year follow-up (n = 463, predictive validity). The longitudinal follow-up suggested that FES-I scores increased over time regardless of any fall event, with a trend for a stronger increase in FES-I scores when a person suffered multiple falls in a 3-month period. Additionally, using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, cut-points were defined to differentiate between lower and higher levels of concern. CONCLUSIONS: the current study builds on the previously established psychometric properties of the FES-I. Both scales have acceptable structures, good validity and reliability and can be recommended for research and clinical purposes. Future studies should explore the FES-I's responsiveness to change during intervention studies and confirm suggested cut-points in other settings, larger samples and across different cultures.
Authors: Janelle Unger; Katherine Chan; Carol Y Scovil; B Catharine Craven; Avril Mansfield; Kei Masani; Kristin E Musselman Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2019-04-01
Authors: Matthew J Miller; Jennifer Stevens-Lapsley; Thomas T Fields; David Coons; Susan Bray-Hall; William Sullivan; Cory L Christiansen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Julie Loebach Wetherell; Emily S Bower; Kristen Johnson; Douglas G Chang; Samuel R Ward; Andrew J Petkus Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Javad Razjouyan; Gurtej Singh Grewal; Talal K Talal; David G Armstrong; Joseph L Mills; Bijan Najafi Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2017-04-24
Authors: Cory L Christiansen; Matthew J Miller; Paul W Kline; Thomas T Fields; William J Sullivan; Patrick J Blatchford; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: PM R Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: M J Boyce; A B McCambridge; L V Bradnam; C G Canning; N Mahant; F C F Chang; V S C Fung; A P Verhagen Journal: J Neural Transm (Vienna) Date: 2021-07-31 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Jennifer L Moore; Kirsten Potter; Kathleen Blankshain; Sandra L Kaplan; Linda C OʼDwyer; Jane E Sullivan Journal: J Neurol Phys Ther Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 3.649