BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Low social support is associated with worse outcomes in patients with heart failure. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of registry data from patients (n = 475) with confirmed heart failure. RESULTS: The MSPSS demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability. Factor analysis yielded 3 factors that explained 83% of the variance in perceived social support. More than half of the sample had depressive symptoms (56%). Hypothesis testing demonstrated that worse perceived social support was a predictor of depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: The MSPSS is a reliable and valid instrument to measure perceived social support in patients with heart failure.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Low social support is associated with worse outcomes in patients with heart failure. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of registry data from patients (n = 475) with confirmed heart failure. RESULTS: The MSPSS demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability. Factor analysis yielded 3 factors that explained 83% of the variance in perceived social support. More than half of the sample had depressive symptoms (56%). Hypothesis testing demonstrated that worse perceived social support was a predictor of depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: The MSPSS is a reliable and valid instrument to measure perceived social support in patients with heart failure.
Authors: Elliane Irani; Scott Emory Moore; Ronald L Hickman; Mary A Dolansky; Richard A Josephson; Joel W Hughes Journal: J Cardiovasc Nurs Date: 2019 Jul/Aug Impact factor: 2.083
Authors: Seongkum Heo; Terry A Lennie; Debra K Moser; Sandra B Dunbar; Susan J Pressler; JinShil Kim Journal: Geriatr Nurs Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 2.361
Authors: Ellen Moseholm; Micheal D Fetters; Inka Aho; Åsa Mellgren; Isik S Johansen; Merete Storgaard; Gitte Pedersen; Terese L Katzenstein; Nina Weis Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 2.692