Testing the activity pacing questionnaire for validity, reliability and responsiveness: An outcome measure validation study.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Deborah Antcliff, Gareth McCray, Rosa MacKenzie, Janiece Marriott-Smith, Kathryn Cawley, Melanie A Holden
{"title":"Testing the activity pacing questionnaire for validity, reliability and responsiveness: An outcome measure validation study.","authors":"Deborah Antcliff, Gareth McCray, Rosa MacKenzie, Janiece Marriott-Smith, Kathryn Cawley, Melanie A Holden","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Activity pacing aims to manage symptoms of chronic pain and improve function by modifying pain-related behaviours: avoidance, overdoing and overdoing-underdoing cycling. Research regarding the effectiveness of activity pacing is unclear, and hindered by the absence of a validated scale. The previously developed 28-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-28) comprises five domains: Activity adjustment, Activity planning, Activity consistency, Activity progression and Activity acceptance. This study aimed to shorten the APQ and provide evidence for its validity, reliability and responsiveness. Paper-based questionnaires collected data from patients with chronic pain attending healthcare services in England, UK, at baseline (n=347), and again at 2-weeks (n=130) and 12-weeks (n=121). Outcome measures included the APQ-28, and other measures of pacing, avoidance, overdoing, pain, self-efficacy, quality of life, physical/mental function, depression and anxiety. Statistical analyses explored validity, reliability, responsiveness and measurement error. Factor analysis (n=347) showed poor model fit for the previous five-factor model, leading to selecting a four-factor model (removing Activity acceptance) with three items per domain, forming the APQ-12 (CFI=0.995, TLI=0.992, RMSEA=0.052, SRMR=0.050). The four domains showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.70-0.84) and test-retest reliability (n=130, ICC=0.53-0.64). Only Activity consistency showed significant responsiveness (n=121, Rho=0.27, 95% CI=0.1-0.43). Measurement error of the APQ-12 domains included smallest detectable change (range=1.55-1.76), standard error of measurement (range=0.56-0.63) and minimally important change (range=-0.17-0.33). Confirmatory factor analysis on external data supported the four-domain structure (CFI=0.983, TLI=0.977, RMSEA=0.071, SRMR=0.106). The APQ-12 shows promise as a multi-domain measure of activity pacing for use in clinical practice and future research. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the psychometric properties of the 12-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-12). The APQ-12 provides a multi-domain measure of activity pacing. It has potential clinical and research use to assess changes in activity pacing and explore the effects of activity pacing on symptoms of chronic pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"105568"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2025.105568","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Activity pacing aims to manage symptoms of chronic pain and improve function by modifying pain-related behaviours: avoidance, overdoing and overdoing-underdoing cycling. Research regarding the effectiveness of activity pacing is unclear, and hindered by the absence of a validated scale. The previously developed 28-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-28) comprises five domains: Activity adjustment, Activity planning, Activity consistency, Activity progression and Activity acceptance. This study aimed to shorten the APQ and provide evidence for its validity, reliability and responsiveness. Paper-based questionnaires collected data from patients with chronic pain attending healthcare services in England, UK, at baseline (n=347), and again at 2-weeks (n=130) and 12-weeks (n=121). Outcome measures included the APQ-28, and other measures of pacing, avoidance, overdoing, pain, self-efficacy, quality of life, physical/mental function, depression and anxiety. Statistical analyses explored validity, reliability, responsiveness and measurement error. Factor analysis (n=347) showed poor model fit for the previous five-factor model, leading to selecting a four-factor model (removing Activity acceptance) with three items per domain, forming the APQ-12 (CFI=0.995, TLI=0.992, RMSEA=0.052, SRMR=0.050). The four domains showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.70-0.84) and test-retest reliability (n=130, ICC=0.53-0.64). Only Activity consistency showed significant responsiveness (n=121, Rho=0.27, 95% CI=0.1-0.43). Measurement error of the APQ-12 domains included smallest detectable change (range=1.55-1.76), standard error of measurement (range=0.56-0.63) and minimally important change (range=-0.17-0.33). Confirmatory factor analysis on external data supported the four-domain structure (CFI=0.983, TLI=0.977, RMSEA=0.071, SRMR=0.106). The APQ-12 shows promise as a multi-domain measure of activity pacing for use in clinical practice and future research. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the psychometric properties of the 12-item Activity Pacing Questionnaire (APQ-12). The APQ-12 provides a multi-domain measure of activity pacing. It has potential clinical and research use to assess changes in activity pacing and explore the effects of activity pacing on symptoms of chronic pain.

测试活动节奏问卷的效度、信度和反应性:一项结果测量验证研究。
活动起搏旨在通过改变与疼痛相关的行为:回避、过度运动和过度运动-过度运动循环来控制慢性疼痛症状并改善功能。关于活动起搏的有效性的研究尚不清楚,并且由于缺乏有效的量表而受到阻碍。先前开发的28项活动节奏问卷(APQ-28)包括五个领域:活动调整、活动计划、活动一致性、活动进展和活动接受。本研究旨在缩短APQ,并为其效度、信度和反应性提供证据。纸质问卷收集了在英国英格兰参加医疗保健服务的慢性疼痛患者在基线(n=347)、2周(n=130)和12周(n=121)时的数据。结果测量包括APQ-28,以及其他衡量节奏、回避、过度、疼痛、自我效能、生活质量、身心功能、抑郁和焦虑的指标。统计分析探讨了效度、信度、反应性和测量误差。因子分析(n=347)表明,之前的五因素模型拟合性较差,因此选择四因素模型(去掉活动接受度),每个域有三个项目,形成APQ-12 (CFI=0.995, TLI=0.992, RMSEA=0.052, SRMR=0.050)。四个域具有良好的内部一致性(Cronbach’s alpha=0.70 ~ 0.84)和重测信度(n=130, ICC=0.53 ~ 0.64)。只有活性一致性显示显著的反应性(n=121, Rho=0.27, 95% CI=0.1-0.43)。APQ-12结构域的测量误差包括最小可检测变化(范围=1.55 ~ 1.76)、测量标准误差(范围=0.56 ~ 0.63)和最小重要变化(范围=-0.17 ~ 0.33)。外部数据验证性因子分析支持四域结构(CFI=0.983, TLI=0.977, RMSEA=0.071, SRMR=0.106)。APQ-12有望在临床实践和未来研究中作为一种多领域的活动起搏测量方法。视角:本文介绍了12项活动节奏问卷(APQ-12)的心理测量特征。APQ-12提供了一种多域测量活动节奏的方法。它具有潜在的临床和研究用途,以评估活动起搏的变化,并探讨活动起搏对慢性疼痛症状的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信