Explorando la validez de constructo del índice de Barthel en una muestra de pacientes hospitalizados españoles

IF 0.7 Q4 NURSING
María Jesús Valero-Chillerón , Irene Llagostera-Reverter , David Luna-Aleixós , Mayte Moreno-Casbas , Laura Andreu-Pejó , Víctor M. González-Chordá
{"title":"Explorando la validez de constructo del índice de Barthel en una muestra de pacientes hospitalizados españoles","authors":"María Jesús Valero-Chillerón ,&nbsp;Irene Llagostera-Reverter ,&nbsp;David Luna-Aleixós ,&nbsp;Mayte Moreno-Casbas ,&nbsp;Laura Andreu-Pejó ,&nbsp;Víctor M. González-Chordá","doi":"10.1016/j.enfcli.2023.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Examine the construct validity of the Barthel Index in adult inpatient units.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A secondary analysis was performed on a sample of 1342 adult patients admitted to inpatient units. A confirmatory factor analysis of the Barthel Index did not confirm its unidimensional structure (CFA-1). Therefore, two methods were explored to find a solution with a better fit. The sequence of the classical exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods was carried out (CFA-2). In contrast, a Gaussian graphical model and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA-3) were performed. Three models were compared on the basis of several goodness-of-fit indicators.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>CFA-1 results (χ<sup>2</sup> = 161616; <em>P</em> &lt; .001; RMSEA = .183) indicated a poor fit between the model and the data. Exploratory factor analysis provided a model with two dimensions that explained 86% of the variance and improved the goodness-of-fit in CFA-2 (χ<sup>2</sup> = 846; <em>P</em> &lt; .001; RMSEA = .133). The Gaussian graphical model, by removing the item ‘Bladder’, offered a solution with three dimensions that improved the goodness-of-fit compared to the previous models (χ<sup>2</sup> = 492; <em>P</em> &lt; .001; RMSEA = .09).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The Barthel Index is not a unidimensional measure of functional capacity when applied to adult inpatient units. The best-fitting model has a three-dimensional structure (Hygiene; Feeding and disposal; Mobility) that relates to the domains of care needs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46453,"journal":{"name":"Enfermeria Clinica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enfermeria Clinica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1130862123000797","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Examine the construct validity of the Barthel Index in adult inpatient units.

Methods

A secondary analysis was performed on a sample of 1342 adult patients admitted to inpatient units. A confirmatory factor analysis of the Barthel Index did not confirm its unidimensional structure (CFA-1). Therefore, two methods were explored to find a solution with a better fit. The sequence of the classical exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods was carried out (CFA-2). In contrast, a Gaussian graphical model and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA-3) were performed. Three models were compared on the basis of several goodness-of-fit indicators.

Results

CFA-1 results (χ2 = 161616; P < .001; RMSEA = .183) indicated a poor fit between the model and the data. Exploratory factor analysis provided a model with two dimensions that explained 86% of the variance and improved the goodness-of-fit in CFA-2 (χ2 = 846; P < .001; RMSEA = .133). The Gaussian graphical model, by removing the item ‘Bladder’, offered a solution with three dimensions that improved the goodness-of-fit compared to the previous models (χ2 = 492; P < .001; RMSEA = .09).

Conclusions

The Barthel Index is not a unidimensional measure of functional capacity when applied to adult inpatient units. The best-fitting model has a three-dimensional structure (Hygiene; Feeding and disposal; Mobility) that relates to the domains of care needs.

探讨巴特尔指数在西班牙住院患者样本中的结构效度
目的检验Barthel指数在成人住院部的结构效度。方法对1342例住院成人患者进行二次分析。Barthel指数的验证性因子分析并未证实其单维结构(CFA-1)。因此,我们探索了两种方法来寻找一个更适合的解决方案。采用经典探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析方法(CFA-2)进行排序。采用高斯图模型和验证性因子分析(CFA-3)进行对比。根据几个拟合优度指标对三种模型进行了比较。结果scfa -1结果(χ2 = 161616;P & lt;措施;RMSEA = .183)表明模型与数据的拟合较差。探索性因子分析提供了一个具有两个维度的模型,可以解释86%的方差,并提高了CFA-2的拟合优度(χ2 = 846;P & lt;措施;Rmsea = .133)。高斯图形模型通过去掉项目“膀胱”,提供了一个三维的解决方案,与以前的模型相比,该解决方案提高了拟合优度(χ2 = 492;P & lt;措施;Rmsea = .09)。结论Barthel指数不适用于成人住院病房功能能力的单维测量。最适合的模型具有三维结构(卫生学;饲养和处置;移动性),这与护理需求的领域有关。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Enfermería Clínica is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is a useful and necessary tool for nursing professionals from the different areas of nursing (healthcare, administration, education and research) as well as for healthcare professionals involved in caring for persons, families and the community. It is the only Spanish nursing journal that mainly publishes original research. The aim of the Journal is to promote increased knowledge through the publication of original research and other studies that may help nursing professionals improve their daily practice. This objective is pursued throughout the different sections that comprise the Journal: Original Articles and Short Original Articles, Special Articles, Patient Care and Letters to the Editor. There is also an Evidence-Based Nursing section that includes comments about original articles of special interest written by experts.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信