The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India · 2021
Validation of the OPtimal Treatment of Angina (OPTA) Questionnaire in Indian Patients with Chronic Stable Angina.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jadhav Uday, Nair Tiny, Jayagopal P B, Pinto Brian, Srivastava Sameer, Sahoo Prasant Kr, Davidson Deepak
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A rising burden of coronary artery disease (CAD) in India is a major cause of concern, with angina being the leading manifestation. Hence a questionnaire to sensitize the clinicians about stable angina management and to assist in risk stratification is imperative.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the content and face validity of a modified questionnaire adapted from the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of six experts in the field of evidence-based practice reviewed and rated the modified instrument for content clarity and relevance based on the 4-point ordinal scale. Face validity was assessed based on the trichotomous rating of "disagreed", "agree" or "neutral". Items on which ≥75% of patients "disagreed" were subjected to further review and revision.
RESULTS: A total of six experts and 51 patients participated in the content and face validity, respectively. As no question received a score ≤2 by two or more experts for either content clarity or relevance, no modification in the questionnaire was required post content validation. During face validation, all patients agreed that the questions correctly measured the specific area of cardiovascular health status and response options correctly captured the answers provided. Demographic and baseline data of the patients were collected.
CONCLUSION: The newly developed 5-item questionnaire demonstrated content and face validity, suggesting it to be a potential instrument to improve management decision and care of angina patients in India.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the content and face validity of a modified questionnaire adapted from the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of six experts in the field of evidence-based practice reviewed and rated the modified instrument for content clarity and relevance based on the 4-point ordinal scale. Face validity was assessed based on the trichotomous rating of "disagreed", "agree" or "neutral". Items on which ≥75% of patients "disagreed" were subjected to further review and revision.
RESULTS: A total of six experts and 51 patients participated in the content and face validity, respectively. As no question received a score ≤2 by two or more experts for either content clarity or relevance, no modification in the questionnaire was required post content validation. During face validation, all patients agreed that the questions correctly measured the specific area of cardiovascular health status and response options correctly captured the answers provided. Demographic and baseline data of the patients were collected.
CONCLUSION: The newly developed 5-item questionnaire demonstrated content and face validity, suggesting it to be a potential instrument to improve management decision and care of angina patients in India.