IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p15450-d980366.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire in People with Stroke

Author

Listed:
  • Shamay S. M. Ng

    (Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China
    Research Centre for Chinese Medicine Innovation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Lily Y. W. Ho

    (Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China
    School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Nga-Huen Chan

    (Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China
    Research Centre for Chinese Medicine Innovation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Tai-Wa Liu

    (School of Nursing and Health Studies, Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Ho Man Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Billy So

    (Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China
    Research Centre for Chinese Medicine Innovation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong SAR, China)

Abstract

The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire was developed for generic use in the assessment of participation and activity levels. However, it is not available in Chinese and has not been tested in the stroke population. The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire was translated into Chinese and culturally adapted. Its psychometric properties were examined in 100 people with stroke. The participation and activity levels of people with stroke and healthy people were also compared. Content validity and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.86–0.91) were excellent. The test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.91–0.94) was also satisfactory. The standard error of the measurement was 4.10–5.31, and the minimal detectable change was 11.37–14.71. Convergent and divergent validity were supported by hypothesis testing. The instrument had a five-factor structure without a ceiling effect. Its routine activity and social engagement scores discriminated people with stroke from healthy people. In conclusion, the Chinese version of the Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire is reliable and valid for assessing participation and activity levels in the stroke population.

Suggested Citation

  • Shamay S. M. Ng & Lily Y. W. Ho & Nga-Huen Chan & Tai-Wa Liu & Billy So, 2022. "Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire in People with Stroke," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15450-:d:980366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15450/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15450/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avvai Singam & Charlotte Ytterberg & Kerstin Tham & Lena von Koch, 2015. "Participation in Complex and Social Everyday Activities Six Years after Stroke: Predictors for Return to Pre-Stroke Level," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-12, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Annie Palstam & Astrid Sjödin & Katharina Stibrant Sunnerhagen, 2019. "Participation and autonomy five years after stroke: A longitudinal observational study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, July.
    2. Sheyda Ghanbari Ghoshchi & Sara De Angelis & Giovanni Morone & Monica Panigazzi & Benedetta Persechino & Marco Tramontano & Edda Capodaglio & Pierluigi Zoccolotti & Stefano Paolucci & Marco Iosa, 2020. "Return to Work and Quality of Life after Stroke in Italy: A Study on the Efficacy of Technologically Assisted Neurorehabilitation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-12, July.
    3. Charlotte Ytterberg & Hanne Kaae Kristensen & Malin Tistad & Lena von Koch, 2020. "Factors related to met needs for rehabilitation 6 years after stroke," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Emma Westerlind & Hanna C Persson & Katharina S Sunnerhagen, 2017. "Return to Work after a Stroke in Working Age Persons; A Six-Year Follow Up," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Maya Kylén & Lena Von Koch & Hélène Pessah-Rasmussen & Elizabeth Marcheschi & Charlotte Ytterberg & Ann Heylighen & Marie Elf, 2019. "The Importance of the Built Environment in Person-Centred Rehabilitation at Home: Study Protocol," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Isabela Matos & Adriana Fernandes & Iara Maso & Jamary Oliveira-Filho & Pedro Antônio de Jesus & Helena Fraga-Maia & Elen Beatriz Pinto, 2020. "Investigating predictors of community integration in individuals after stroke in a residential setting: A longitutinal study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-11, May.
    7. Aviva Beit Yosef & Nirit Refaeli & Jeremy M. Jacobs & Jeffrey Shames & Yafit Gilboa, 2022. "Exploring the Multidimensional Participation of Adults Living in the Community in the Chronic Phase following Acquired Brain Injury," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-19, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15450-:d:980366. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.