Andrew Sibley

Measuring autonomy in disabled people: validation of a new scale in a UK population

Objective: To evaluate the validity and reliability of an English version of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire (IPA). The original Dutch IPA has been shown to load onto five factors. Design: A validation study. Setting: Outpatients clinics and people’s homes. Subjects: Two hundred and thirteen people with multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, spinal cord injury, and general practice attendees, stratified by level of disability (median age 54, 42% male, 58% female). Inclusion criteria: English as first language, aged 18-75, Mental Status Questionnaire score >6. Interventions: Self- and interviewer-administered outcome measures. Main measures: IPA, including one new item (66 participants completed the IPA on a second occasion). Other measures: Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), London Handicap Scale, three domains of the Functional Limitations Profile (FLP): household management, social integration, emotion. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the construct validity of the IPA (Normal Fit Index=0.98, Comparative Fit Index=0.99), indicating a good fit to the model. Convergent and discriminant validity were confirmed by the predicted associations, or lack of, with the exception of a poor association between the ‘social life/relationships’ IPA subscale and FLP-emotion. Internal reliability of the IPA was confirmed (Cronbach alphas >0.8; item-total correlations for all subscales >0.5). Test-retest reliability was confirmed for all items (weighted kappas >0.6) and subscales (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.90). Conclusions: The English IPA is a valid, reliable and acceptable measure of participation and autonomy in people with a range of conditions and can make a unique and fundamental contribution to outcome assessment. Further research is required to examine the responsiveness of the IPA to change over time, its clinical utility and suitability for use with people from ethnic minorities and with older people.

Validity of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: A comparison between two countries

Purpose. To evaluate the cross-cultural validity of the five subscales of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA) measure and the full 31-item scale. Method. Data from two validation studies (Dutch and English) were pooled (n = 106). Participants (aged 18 – 75), known to rehabilitation services or GP practices, had conditions ranging from minor ailments to significant disability. Validity of the five subscales and the total scale was examined using Rasch analysis (Partial Credit Model). P values smaller than 0.01 were employed to allow for multiple testing. Results. A number of items in all the subscales except ‘Outdoor Autonomy’ needed rescoring. One ‘Indoor Autonomy’ item showed uniform DIF by country and was split by country. One ‘Work and Education’ item displayed uniform and non-uniform DIF by gender. All the subscales fitted the Rasch model and were invariant across country. A 30-item IPA also fitted the Rasch model. Conclusion. The IPA subscales and a 30-item scale are invariant across the two cultures and gender. The IPA can be used validly to assess participation and autonomy in these populations. Further analyses are required to examine whether the IPA is invariant across differing levels of disability and other disease groups not included in this study.

A Delphi Study of the Role Parameters and Requirements of Extended Scope Practice in Hand Therapy

Physiotherapists and occupational therapists working within hand therapy in the United Kingdom are undertaking roles working beyond their normal professional boundaries. The aim of this study was to reach consensus on the role parameters and required knowledge, training and competencies desirable for such extended roles. A panel of 21 expert stakeholders comprising hand therapy clinicians, educators, doctors, existing extended scope practitioners and a representative from a patient group participated in three survey rounds using the Delphi technique. They examined three groups of parameters with reference to the competencies, knowledge and activities desirable for such extended roles. A prioritised list of parameters was developed. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Response rates for each round were consistently 95% or greater. The results showed areas of clear consensus, with prioritisation supporting the development of an independent practitioner working without direct supervision by a medical practitioner. Specific criteria were identified for such practice with regards to knowledge, training and activities, such as the ability to order, understand and interpret clinical investigations. In-house formal training tailored to individual service needs was the favoured approach. The results of this study can inform the development of a national strategy for the implementation of new ways of working while ensuring the provision of a quality health service.