OBJECTIVE: To develop and psychometrically validate a tool to assess information needs in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients. METHODS: After a literature search, 60 information items divided into 11 areas of needs were identified. To establish content validity, they were reviewed by an expert panel (N=10). Refined items were pilot-tested in 34 patients on a 5-point Likert-scale from 1 "really not helpful" to 5 "very important". A final version was generated and psychometrically tested in 203 CR patients. Test-retest reliability was assessed via the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, and criterion validity was assessed with regard to patient's education and duration in CR. RESULTS: Five items were excluded after ICC analysis as well as one area of needs. All 10 areas were considered internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha>0.7). Criterion validity was supported by significant differences in mean scores by educational level (p<0.05) and duration in CR (p<0.001). The mean total score was 4.08 ± 0.53. Patients rated safety as their greatest information need. CONCLUSION: The INCR Tool was demonstrated to have good reliability and validity. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This is an appropriate tool for application in clinical and research settings, assessing patients' needs during CR and as part of education programming.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and psychometrically validate a tool to assess information needs in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients. METHODS: After a literature search, 60 information items divided into 11 areas of needs were identified. To establish content validity, they were reviewed by an expert panel (N=10). Refined items were pilot-tested in 34 patients on a 5-point Likert-scale from 1 "really not helpful" to 5 "very important". A final version was generated and psychometrically tested in 203 CR patients. Test-retest reliability was assessed via the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, and criterion validity was assessed with regard to patient's education and duration in CR. RESULTS: Five items were excluded after ICC analysis as well as one area of needs. All 10 areas were considered internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha>0.7). Criterion validity was supported by significant differences in mean scores by educational level (p<0.05) and duration in CR (p<0.001). The mean total score was 4.08 ± 0.53. Patients rated safety as their greatest information need. CONCLUSION: The INCR Tool was demonstrated to have good reliability and validity. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This is an appropriate tool for application in clinical and research settings, assessing patients' needs during CR and as part of education programming.
Authors: Christiani Decker Batista Bonin; Rafaella Zulianello dos Santos; Gabriela Lima de Melo Ghisi; Ariany Marques Vieira; Ricardo Amboni; Magnus Benetti Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2014-02-17 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Erika R Cappelletti; Andrea Greco; Alessandro Maloberti; Cristina Giannattasio; Patrizia Steca; Marco D'Addario Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Rafaella Zulianello Dos Santos; Christiani Decker Batista Bonin; Eliara Ten Caten Martins; Moacir Pereira Junior; Gabriela Lima de Melo Ghisi; Kassia Rosangela Paz de Macedo; Magnus Benetti Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 2.000