| Literature DB >> 35564691 |
Mateus Dias Antunes1, Ana Carolina Basso Schmitt1, Amélia Pasqual Marques1.
Abstract
Health education is one of the main items to enable the promotion of health for individuals with fibromyalgia (FM) in Primary Health Care (PHC) in Brazil. The purpose of this study was to validate a multidisciplinary educational health promotion program called Amigos de Fibro (Fibro Friends) for individuals with FM. Methodological research involving 23 health professionals (expert judges) and 45 individuals with FM (target audience) used an instrument to assess the objectives, proposed themes and initiatives, relevance, writing style, and structure of the program through the Delphi technique. The content validity index (CVI) ≥ 0.78 and coefficient kappa ≥ 0.61 were used for data analysis. All 25 items evaluated in both groups presented considerable minimum CVI by CVI and the kappa coefficient. In the global evaluation of Amigos de Fibro, the CVI of the specialist judges was 0.90, while the values of the target audience judges were 0.95. The kappa coefficient of the expert judges was 0.90 and that of the target audience judges was 0.85. Amigos de Fibro, a light technology in health, was considered with adequate content validity and internal consistency and is, therefore, valid in the use by health professionals with the target audience in PHC, making it possible for them to act as health-promoting agents.Entities:
Keywords: educational technology; fibromyalgia; health education; health promotion; rheumatology
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35564691 PMCID: PMC9102409 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095297
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Flowchart of the “Amigos de Fibro” validation process.
Script of “Amigos de Fibro”.
| Meeting | Theme | Professional | Physical Exercise Practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Program introduction and socializing | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | The physiotherapist will explain how physical exercises, guidance and practice care will work. |
| 2 | Knowing fibromyalgia | Doctor (educational activity) | Muscle stretching exercise |
| 3 | Health production and care | Nurse (educational activity) | Muscle strengthening exercises |
| 4 | Family and work | Social Worker (educational activity) | Muscle stretching exercise |
| 5 | Body practices and physical activity | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | Muscle strengthening exercises |
| 6 | Adequate and healthy eating | Nutritionist (educational activity) | Muscle stretching exercise |
| 7 | Health and Well-Being | Psychologist (educational activity) | Muscle strengthening exercises |
| 8 | Pharmacological approach | Pharmacist (educational activity) | Muscle stretching exercise |
| 9 | Integration of the activities | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | Guidance to perform stretching and muscle strengthening exercises at home |
| 10 | Integrative and complementary practices | Naturologist (educational activity) | Muscle strengthening exercises |
| 11 | Integration of the activities | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | Guidance to perform stretching and muscle strengthening exercises at home |
| 12 | Occupational performance | Occupational Therapist (educational activity) | Muscle stretching exercise |
| 13 | Integration of the activities | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | Guidance to perform stretching and muscle strengthening exercises at home |
| 14 | Sleep Quality | Speech therapist (educational activity) | Muscle strengthening exercises |
| 15 | Retrospective | Physiotherapist (educational activity) | The physiotherapist will reinforce the guidelines on the continuity of the practice of physical exercise and its benefits |
Profile of expert judges (n = 23).
| Variables |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 10 | 43.5 |
| Female | 13 | 56.5 |
| Age | ||
| 20 to 30 years | 4 | 17.4 |
| 31 to 40 years | 9 | 39.2 |
| 41 to 50 years | 4 | 17.4 |
| 51 years or more | 6 | 26.1 |
| Marital Status | ||
| Married or living with a partner | 12 | 53 |
| Divorced | 1 | 4.3 |
| Separated | - | - |
| Widowed | 1 | 4.3 |
| Single | 9 | 39.2 |
| Race/color | ||
| White | 19 | 82.7 |
| Brown | 3 | 13 |
| Black | 1 | 4.3 |
| Yellow | - | - |
| Indigenous | - | - |
| Profession | ||
| Physiotherapist | 4 | 17.4 |
| Rheumatologist doctor | 3 | 13 |
| Nurse | 2 | 8.7 |
| Psychologist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Nutritionist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Occupational therapist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Speech therapist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Pharmacist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Naturologist | 2 | 8.7 |
| Social worker | 2 | 8.7 |
| Currently Teaching | ||
| Yes | 23 | 100 |
| No | - | - |
| Years as a Graduate | ||
| 1 to 10 years | 7 | 30.4 |
| 11 to 20 years | 9 | 39.2 |
| More than 21 years | 7 | 30.4 |
| Highest Degree | ||
| Specialization/Residency | 3 | 13 |
| Master’s Degree | 6 | 26.1 |
| Doctorate Degree | 9 | 39.2 |
| Postdoctorate Degree | 5 | 21.7 |
| Has a course/thesis/dissertation work in the area of interest | ||
| Yes | 23 | 100 |
| No | - | - |
| Has, in the last five years, published an article on the area of interest in an indexed journal | ||
| 1 to 10 publications | 16 | 69.6 |
| 11 to 20 publications | 3 | 13 |
| More than 21 publications | 4 | 17.4 |
| Teaching experience in the area | ||
| 1 to 10 years | 15 | 65.2 |
| 11 to 20 years | 6 | 26.1 |
| More than 21 years | 2 | 8.7 |
| Practical work in the area of interest | ||
| 1 to 10 years | 11 | 47.8 |
| 11 to 20 years | 9 | 39.2 |
| More than 21 years | 3 | 13 |
Judgments of expert judges (n = 23) on Amigos de Fibro.
| Items | Judgment | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totally Inadequate | Partially Inadequate | Adequate | Totally Adequate | CVI * | Kappa | |||||
|
| % |
| % |
| % |
| % | |||
| 1. Objectives | ||||||||||
| 1.1 Care innovation potential for people with fibromyalgia | - | - | - | - | 3 | 13 | 20 | 87 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 1.2 Clarity of the program’s objective | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 2 | 8.7 | 19 | 82.6 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 1.3 Relevance of the theoretical framework | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 3 | 13 | 18 | 78.3 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 1.4 Basic premises capable of guiding people with fibromyalgia in promoting their health | - | - | - | - | 4 | 17.4 | 19 | 82.6 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 2. Proposed Themes and Initiatives | ||||||||||
| 2.1 The themes and initiatives listed offer support in promoting the health of people with fibromyalgia | - | - | - | - | 3 | 13 | 20 | 87 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 2.2 The themes and initiatives listed are important to be applied to people with fibromyalgia in primary health care | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 4 | 17.4 | 18 | 78.3 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 3. Relevance | ||||||||||
| 3.1 Covers relevant topics for in promoting health for people with fibromyalgia | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 2 | 8.7 | 19 | 83 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 3.2 Addresses important premises for the practice of health education | - | - | - | - | 4 | 17.4 | 19 | 82.6 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 3.3 Is innovative technology | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 4 | 17.4 | 18 | 78.3 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 3.4 Is a combination of multidisciplinary knowledge and practices | - | - | - | - | 4 | 17.4 | 19 | 82.6 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 3.5 Has scalability potential | - | - | 4 | 17.4 | 2 | 8.7 | 17 | 73.9 | 0.82 | 0.74 |
| 3.6 Is an approach that integrates multidisciplinary knowledge | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 2 | 8.7 | 19 | 82.6 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 4. Writing Style | ||||||||||
| 4.1 Ordering of content and initiatives | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 4 | 17.4 | 18 | 78.3 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 4.2 Clarity of the text | - | - | 3 | 13 | 3 | 13 | 17 | 73.9 | 0.86 | 0.79 |
| 4.3 The vocabulary used | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 2 | 8.7 | 19 | 82.6 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 4.4 The extent of the material | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 5 | 21.7 | 16 | 69.6 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 4.5 Complexity of the text | - | - | 4 | 17.4 | 3 | 13 | 16 | 69.6 | 0.82 | 0.74 |
| 4.6 Common vocabulary for professionals | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 4 | 17.4 | 17 | 73.9 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 5. Structure of the Program | ||||||||||
| 5.1 Number of participating professionals | - | - | - | - | - | - | 23 | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 5.2 Structure of the program (number, frequency, time/duration, period of the day, day of the week) | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 4 | 17.4 | 17 | 73.9 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
| 5.3 Conditions offered by the professional | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 2 | 8.7 | 20 | 87 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 5.4 Activities performed by the participant | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 3 | 13 | 19 | 82.6 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 5.5 Product of the participant’s activity | - | - | 1 | 4.3 | 2 | 8.7 | 20 | 87 | 0.95 | 0.93 |
| 5.6 Evaluative questions | - | - | - | - | 3 | 13 | 20 | 87 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 5.7 References for use | - | - | 2 | 8.7 | 5 | 21.7 | 16 | 69.6 | 0.91 | 0.86 |
* Caption: CVI: content validity index.
Profile of target audience judges (n = 45).
| Variables |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Male | 4 | 9 |
| Female | 41 | 91 |
| Age | ||
| 20 to 30 years | 9 | 20 |
| 31 to 40 years | 17 | 38 |
| 41 to 50 years | 14 | 31 |
| 51 years or more | 5 | 11 |
| Marital Status | ||
| Married or living with a partner | 29 | 65 |
| Divorced | 2 | 4 |
| Separated | 1 | 2 |
| Widowed | - | - |
| Single | 13 | 29 |
| Race/color | ||
| White | 24 | 53 |
| Brown | 17 | 38 |
| Black | 3 | 7 |
| Yellow | 1 | 2 |
| Indigenous | - | - |
| Education | ||
| Middle school incomplete | 1 | 2 |
| Middle School complete | 1 | 2 |
| High school incomplete | 2 | 4 |
| High school complete | 7 | 16 |
| College incomplete | 22 | 49 |
| College complete | 12 | 27 |
| Did not attend school | - | - |
| Monthly income | ||
| 1 to 2 minimum wages | 27 | 60 |
| 2 to 3 minimum wages | 6 | 13 |
| More than 3 times the minimum wage | 12 | 27 |
| Retired | ||
| Yes | 44 | 98 |
| No | 1 | 2 |
| Smokes | ||
| Yes | 4 | 9 |
| No | 36 | 80 |
| Used to smoke | 5 | 11 |
| Self-perception of health | ||
| Poor | 18 | 40 |
| Regular | 17 | 38 |
| Good | 10 | 22 |
| Very good | - | - |
| Number of medications being taken | ||
| None | 6 | 13 |
| 1 to 2 medications | 9 | 20 |
| 3 or more medications | 30 | 67 |
| Illnesses beyond fibromyalgia | ||
| None | 5 | 11 |
| 1 or 2 illnesses | 32 | 71 |
| 3 or more illnesses | 8 | 18 |
Judgments of the target audience judges (n = 45) on Amigos de Fibro.
| Items | Judgment | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totally Inadequate | Partially Inadequate | Adequate | Totally Adequate | CVI * | Kappa | |||||
|
| % |
| % |
| % |
| % | |||
| 1. Objectives | ||||||||||
| 1.1 Care innovation potential for people with fibromyalgia | - | - | - | - | 12 | 26.7 | 33 | 73.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 1.2 Clarity of the program’s objective | - | - | 4 | 8.9 | 15 | 33.3 | 26 | 57.8 | 0.91 | 0.83 |
| 1.3 Relevance of the theoretical framework | - | - | 4 | 8.9 | 16 | 35.6 | 25 | 55.6 | 0.91 | 0.83 |
| 1.4 Basic premises capable of guiding people with fibromyalgia in promoting their health | - | - | - | - | 17 | 37.8 | 28 | 62.2 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 2. Proposed Themes and Initiatives | ||||||||||
| 2.1 The themes and initiatives listed offer support in promoting the health of people with fibromyalgia | - | - | - | - | 14 | 31.1 | 31 | 68.9 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 2.2 The themes and initiatives listed are important to be applied to people with fibromyalgia in primary health care | - | - | - | - | 16 | 35.6 | 29 | 64.4 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 3. Relevance | ||||||||||
| 3.1 Covers relevant topics for in promoting health for people with fibromyalgia | - | - | 6 | 13.3 | 12 | 26.7 | 27 | 60 | 0.86 | 0.76 |
| 3.2 Addresses important premises for the practice of health education | - | - | 5 | 11.1 | 18 | 40 | 22 | 48.9 | 0.88 | 0.79 |
| 3.3 Is innovative technology | - | - | - | - | 23 | 51.1 | 22 | 48.9 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 3.4 Is a combination of multidisciplinary knowledge and practices | - | - | 3 | 6.7 | 15 | 33.3 | 27 | 60 | 0.93 | 0.86 |
| 3.5 Has scalability potential | - | - | 5 | 11.1 | 20 | 44.4 | 20 | 44.4 | 0.88 | 0.79 |
| 3.6 Is an approach that integrates multidisciplinary knowledge | - | - | - | - | 18 | 40 | 27 | 60 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 4. Writing Style | ||||||||||
| 4.1 Ordering of content and initiatives | - | - | 2 | 4.4 | 20 | 44.4 | 23 | 51.1 | 0.95 | 0.90 |
| 4.2 Clarity of the text | - | - | 2 | 4.4 | 12 | 26.7 | 31 | 68.9 | 0.95 | 0.90 |
| 4.3 The vocabulary used | - | - | - | - | 15 | 33.3 | 30 | 66.7 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 4.4 The extent of the material | - | - | - | - | 18 | 40 | 27 | 60 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 4.5 Complexity of the text | - | - | - | - | 17 | 37.8 | 28 | 62.2 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 4.6 Common vocabulary for professionals | - | - | 2 | 4.4 | 17 | 37.8 | 26 | 62.2 | 0.95 | 0.90 |
| 5. Structure of the Program | ||||||||||
| 5.1 Number of participating professionals | - | - | - | - | 21 | 46.7 | 24 | 53.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 5.2 Structure of the program (number, frequency, time/duration, period of the day, day of the week) | - | - | 5 | 11.1 | 20 | 44.4 | 20 | 44.4 | 0.88 | 0.79 |
| 5.3 Conditions offered by the professional | - | - | 2 | 4.4 | 23 | 51.1 | 20 | 44.4 | 0.95 | 0.90 |
| 5.4 Activities performed by the participant | - | - | 2 | 4.4 | 20 | 44.4 | 23 | 51.1 | 0.95 | 0.90 |
| 5.5 Product of the participant’s activity | - | - | - | - | 21 | 46.7 | 24 | 53.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 5.6 Evaluative questions | - | - | 1 | 2.2 | 20 | 44.4 | 24 | 53.3 | 0.97 | 0.95 |
| 5.7 References for use | - | - | 1 | 2.2 | 20 | 44.4 | 24 | 53.3 | 0.97 | 0.95 |
* Caption: CVI: content validity index.