| Literature DB >> 35813232 |
Tai Wa Liu1, Shamay S M Ng2, Joshua Tsoh3, Peiming Chen2, Richard H Xu2, Thomson W L Wong2, Mimi M Y Tse1,4.
Abstract
Background: Social support is important for stroke rehabilitation. Conventionally, social support is evaluated from the level of support received. However, the bidirectional support hypothesis postulated that self-perceived social support is optimized if individuals provide and receive social support in a balanced manner. The Brief 2-Way Social Support Scale (Brief 2-Way SSS) is a social support instrument measuring the reciprocity of receiving and giving emotional and instrumental social support. Objective: (1) To translate and culturally adapt the English version of the Brief 2-Way SSS into Chinese (Cantonese) (Brief 2-Way SSS-C), (2) to report the results of validation of the Brief 2-Way SSS-C, and (3) to investigate the level of social support in people with stroke in Hong Kong.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35813232 PMCID: PMC9259340 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3511631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Characteristics of participants.
| Stroke participants ( | Healthy participants ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (y), mean (SD) | 63.63 (6.24) | 61.74 (7.39) |
| Sex, | ||
| Women | 46 (42.2) | 38 (71.7) |
| Men | 63 (57.8) | 15 (28.3) |
| BMI (kg/m2), mean (SD) | 23.96 (3.02) | 22.59 (3.09) |
| Education level, | ||
| Primary or below | 24 (22.0) | 9 (17.0) |
| Secondary | 70 (64.2) | 36 (67.9) |
| College or above | 15 (13.8) | 8 (15.1) |
| Marital status, | ||
| Single | 11 (10.1) | 7 (13.2) |
| Married | 81 (74.3) | 45 (84.9) |
| Divorced/separated | 8 (7.3) | 1 (1.9) |
| Widowed/widowered | 9 (8.3) | 0 |
| Living arrangement, | ||
| Alone | 10 (9.2) | 5 (9.4) |
| With family | 99 (90.8) | 48 (90.6) |
| Type of stroke, | ||
| Ischemia | 75 (68.8) | |
| Haemorrhage | 34 (31.2) | |
| Years since stroke (y), mean (SD) | 6.58 (4.30) | |
| Hemiplegic side, | ||
| Left | 49 (45.0) | |
| Right | 60 (55.0) | |
| FMA-LE, mean (SD) | 24.45 (5.47) | |
| TUGT, mean (SD) | 16.14 (12.51) | |
| CIM-C, mean (SD) | 39.87 (7.56) | |
| PCS, mean (SD) | 38.61 (10.19) | |
| MCS, mean (SD) | 49.23 (10.83) |
n: number; BMI: body mass index; FMA-LE: Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity; TUGT, Timed Up-and-Go Test; CIM-C: the Chinese version of Community Integration Measure; PCS: physical component summary; MCS: mental component summary.
Content validity index of the Chinese (Cantonese) version of the Brief 2-Way SSS.
| Item | Expert A | Expert B | Expert C | Expert D | Expert E | Expert F | Item-level content validity index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 2. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 3. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 4. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 5. | 4 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0.67 |
| 6. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 7. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 8. | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
| 9. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 10. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 11. | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 12. | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
| Scale-level content validity index/mean | 0.97 | ||||||
| Total agreement | 11 | ||||||
| Scale-level content validity index/universal agreement | 0.92 | ||||||
Internal consistency of the Brief 2-Way SSS-C.
| Item no. | Item | Corrected item-total correlation | Cronbach's alpha if item is deleted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Receiving emotion support: 0.88 | |||
| 6 | There is someone in my life I can get emotional support from | 0.74 | 0.85 |
| 9 | When I am feeling down, there is someone I can lean on | 0.82 | 0.78 |
| 10 | There is at least one person that I can share most things with | 0.75 | 0.75 |
| Giving emotion support: 0.85 | |||
| 3 | People confide in me when they have problems | 0.83 | 0.68 |
| 5 | I give others a sense of comfort in times of need | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| 7 | People close to me tell me their fears and worries | 0.66 | 0.84 |
| Receiving instrumental support: 0.87 | |||
| 1 | If stranded somewhere there is someone who would get me | 0.74 | 0.84 |
| 11 | I have someone to help me if I am physically unwell | 0.76 | 0.82 |
| 12 | There is someone who can help me fulfil my responsibilities when I am unable | 0.78 | 0.80 |
| Giving instrumental support: 0.74 | |||
| 2 | I help others when they are too busy to get everything done | 0.55 | 0.66 |
| 4 | I am a person others turn to for help with tasks | 0.61 | 0.58 |
| 8 | I have helped someone with their responsibilities when they were unable to fulfil them | 0.52 | 0.69 |
The results of test-retest reliability.
| Item | Mean 1 | Mean 2 | ICC | 95% CI low | 95% CI high |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.67 | 2.57 | 0.77 | 0.64 | 0.85 |
| 2 | 2.52 | 2.45 | 0.76 | 0.64 | 0.85 |
| 3 | 2.69 | 2.51 | 0.79 | 0.68 | 0.87 |
| 4 | 2.25 | 2.24 | 0.72 | 0.59 | 0.82 |
| 5 | 2.69 | 2.72 | 0.63 | 0.46 | 0.75 |
| 6 | 2.96 | 3.00 | 0.66 | 0.50 | 0.78 |
| 7 | 2.84 | 2.79 | 0.75 | 0.62 | 0.84 |
| 8 | 2.46 | 2.51 | 0.60 | 0.42 | 0.74 |
| 9 | 2.84 | 2.70 | 0.69 | 0.54 | 0.79 |
| 10 | 3.03 | 2.93 | 0.66 | 0.50 | 0.77 |
| 11 | 3.16 | 3.18 | 0.59 | 0.40 | 0.72 |
| 12 | 2.93 | 2.84 | 0.73 | 0.59 | 0.82 |
| Receiving emotional support | 8.82 | 8.63 | 0.76 | 0.64 | 084 |
| Giving emotional support | 8.21 | 8.01 | 0.77 | 0.65 | 0.85 |
| Receiving instrumental support | 8.58 | 8.58 | 0.81 | 0.70 | 0.88 |
| Giving instrumental support. | 7.24 | 7.19 | 0.78 | 0.67 | 0.86 |
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; CI: confidence interval.
Correlations between Brief 2-Way SSS-C and FMA-LE, TUGT, CIM-C, and SF12-C.
| Receive emotional support | Give emotional support | Receive instrumental support | Give instrumental support | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FMA-LE |
|
|
|
|
| TUGT |
|
|
|
|
| CIM-C |
|
|
|
|
| PCS | Rho = −0.01, | Rho = 0.22, | Rho = 0.08, | Rho = 0.36, |
| MCS |
|
|
|
|
∗ p < 0.05. ∗∗p < 0.001. FMA-LE: Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity; CIM-C: Chinese version of the Community Integration Measure; TUGT: Timed Up-and-Go Test; PCS: physical component summary; MCS: mental component summary.
Comparison of Brief 2-Way SSS-C scores between stroke participants and healthy participants.
| Stroke participants ( | Healthy participants ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Receiving emotional support, mean (SD) | 8.91 (2.53) | 10.87 (3.54) | -3.61 ( |
| Giving emotional support, mean (SD) | 8.54 (3.10) | 10.36 (2.67) | -3.85 ( |
| Receiving instrumental support, mean (SD) | 8.89 (2.93) | 10.09 (3.55) | -2.14 ( |
| Giving instrumental support, mean (SD) | 7.57 (2.88) | 10.17 (2.59) | -5.77 ( |
Mean Brief 2-Way SSS-C subscale scores of stroke participants with different characteristics.
| Total sample ( | Receiving emotional support, mean (SD) | Giving emotional support, mean (SD) | Receiving instrumental support, mean (SD) | Giving instrumental support, mean (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, | -0.52 (0.60) | -0.95 (0.34) | -1.56 (0.12) | -1.31 (0.19) |
| Women ( | 9.65 (3.53) | 9.17 (3.71) | 9.89 (3.35) | 8.54 (3.73) |
| Men ( | 9.27 (4.12) | 8.49 (3.65) | 8.86 (3.51) | 7.60 (3.67) |
| Education level, | 1.19 (0.31) | 0.38 (0.68) | 0.45 (0.64) | 0.70 (0.50) |
| Primary school or below ( | 10.42 (3.68) | 8.21 (3.72) | 9.75 (3.57) | 7.63 (3.75) |
| Secondary school ( | 9.27 (3.99) | 8.97 (3.69) | 9.27 (3.61) | 8.30 (3.72) |
| College or above ( | 8.60 (3.46) | 8.80 (3.73) | 8.67 (2.64) | 7.20 (3.71) |
| Marital status, | 0.64 (0.59) | 0.75 (0.52) | 0.15 (0.93) | 1.11 (0.35) |
| Single ( | 9.00 (3.52) | 7.91 (4.28) | 9.00 (3.85) | 6.91 (3.18) |
| Married ( | 9.33 (4.00) | 8.68 (3.67) | 9.26 (3.53) | 7.93 (3.73) |
| Divorced/separated ( | 9.13 (4.29) | 9.38 (4.34) | 9.25 (3.69) | 8.13 (4.85) |
| Widow/widower ( | 11.11 (2.57) | 10.22 (2.17) | 10.00 (2.65) | 9.89 (2.80) |
| Living arrangement, | -0.59 (0.57) | -1.52 (0.16) | -0.41 (0.69) | -1.13 (0.29) |
| Alone | 8.60 (4.77) | 6.70 (4.64) | 8.80 (4.10) | 6.40 (4.81) |
| With family | 9.52 (3.78) | 8.99 (3.53) | 9.34 (3.42) | 8.16 (3.57) |
| Mobility function, | -1.39 (0.17) | -3.27 (0.003)∗ | -1.02 (0.31) | -3.08 (0.004)∗ |
| Low level (FMA-LE<21) ( | 8.41 (3.85) | 6.45 (3.80) | 8.64 (3.35) | 6.14 (3.01) |
| High level (FMA-LE ≥21) ( | 9.69 (3.85) | 9.37 (3.42) | 9.46 (3.50) | 8.47 (3.74) |
∗ p value < 0.05. FMA-LE: Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Lower Extremity.