Original Research

Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors

Peter O. Ibikunle, Anthea Rhoda, Mario R. Smith, Ushotanefe Useh
South African Journal of Physiotherapy | Vol 78, No 1 | a1790 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v78i1.1790 | © 2022 Peter O. Ibikunle, Anthea Rhoda, Mario R. Smith, Ushotanefe Useh | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 22 February 2022 | Published: 28 October 2022

About the author(s)

Peter O. Ibikunle, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa; and, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences and Technology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi, Nigeria; and, Department of Lifestyle Diseases, Faculty of Health, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa
Anthea Rhoda, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
Mario R. Smith, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
Ushotanefe Useh, Department of Lifestyle Diseases, Faculty of Health, North-West University, Mafikeng, South Africa

Abstract

Background: Validation of an instrument consist of three main types: content, criterion and construct. Content validity needs to be determined in order for an instrument to be acceptable for use, validity establishes the fact that an instrument measures exactly what it proposes to measure. The Return-to-work assessment scale (RAS) was developed to measure three aspects of return to work: (Personal factors and/or issues, work issues and contextual factors) in 2021.

Objective: To report on the processes followed in establishing the face and content validity of the RAS.

Method: Twenty participants took part in our study, they were selected purposively and conveniently from a pool of professionals and post stroke survivors. The Delphi survey technique was used to arrive at consensus and professional opinion on the items included in the RAS. Consensus was sought on the items, domains and subdomains included in the RAS that was used to assess return-to-work after a stroke. Our study was concluded after the third round.

Result: One item was remove out of the original 86, three (3) domains made up of eleven (11) subdomains were retained. The RAS had consensus of 100% after three rounds of scrutiny for all items.

Conclusion: The RAS was found to be valid, thereby establishing its face and content validity.

Clinical implication: The RAS is valid and was recommended for psychometric testing which was the next stage after face and content validity.


Keywords

disability; scale; WHO; rehabilitation; validation

Metrics

Total abstract views: 1393
Total article views: 1673


Crossref Citations

No related citations found.