Browsing by Person "Xu, Tianma"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Falls efficacy instruments for community-dwelling older adults: A COSMIN-based systematic review
(BMC, 2021-01-07) Soh, Shawn Leng-Hsien; Lane, Judith; Xu, Tianma; Gleeson, Nigel; Tan, Chee-Wee
Background: Falls efficacy is a widely-studied latent construct in community-dwelling older adults. Various self-reported instruments have been used to measure falls efficacy. In order to be informed of the choice of the best measurement instrument for a specific purpose, empirical evidence of the development and measurement properties of falls efficacy related instruments is needed. Methods: The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Intruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to summarise evidence on the development, content validity, and structural validity of instruments measuring falls efficacy in community-dwelling older adults. Databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, CINAHL were searched (May 2019). Records on the development of instruments and studies assessing content validity or structural validity of falls efficacy related scales were included. COSMIN methodology was used to guide the review of eligible studies and in the assessment of their methodological quality. Evidence of content validity: relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility and unidimensionality for structural validity were synthesised. A modified GRADE approach was applied to evidence synthesis. Results: Thirty-five studies, of which 18 instruments had been identified, were included in the review. High-quality evidence showed that the Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (FES)-13 items (MFES-13) has sufficient relevance, yet insufficient comprehensiveness for measuring falls efficacy. Moderate quality evidence supported that the FES-10 has sufficient relevance, and MFES-14 has sufficient comprehensibility. Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale–Simplified (ABC-15) has sufficient relevance in measuring balance confidence supported by moderate-quality evidence. Low to very low-quality evidence underpinned the content validity of other instruments. High-quality evidence supported sufficient unidimensionality for eight instruments (FES-10, MFES-14, ABC-6, ABC-15, ABC-16, Iconographical FES (Icon-FES), FES–International (FES-I) and Perceived Ability to Prevent and Manage Fall Risks (PAPMFR)). Conclusion: Content validity of instruments to measure falls efficacy is understudied. Structural validity is sufficient for a number of widely-used instruments. Measuring balance confidence is a subset of falls efficacy. Further work is needed to investigate a broader construct for falls efficacy.
Falls efficacy: Extending the understanding of self-efficacy in older adults towards managing falls
(Hylonome Publications, 2021-09) Soh, Shawn Leng-Hsien; Tan, Chee-Wee; Thomas, Janet I.; Tan, Gideon; Xu, Tianma; Ng, Yoke Leng; Lane, Judith; Lyritis, George
Falls efficacy is a widely studied construct. The understanding of falls efficacy has evolved over time. Falls efficacy was initially perceived to be suitably used as a measure of fear of falling. However, further research suggested that falls efficacy and fear of falling are distinct constructs, and therefore, would be inappropriate to be used as a proxy. Instead, some researchers posited that falls efficacy is synonymous with balance confidence. Falls efficacy has been conventionally understood as the perceived ability of individuals to perform activities without losing balance or falling. A recently conducted systematic review by the authors on existing falls efficacy related measures had revealed a fresh perspective of recognising falls efficacy as a perceived ability to manage a threat of a fall. Falls efficacy, with a broadened interpreted construct, relates to the individual’s perceived self-efficacy of performing necessary actions needed in different scenarios, including pre-fall, near-fall, fall-landing and completed fall. The conventional interpretation of falls efficacy needs a rethinking of perspective. An extended understanding of falls efficacy would provide an integral approach towards improving the agency of individual to deal with falls and would enhance person-centred care.
The Balance Recovery Confidence (BRC) Scale.
(2022-10-19) Soh, Shawn Leng-Hsien; Tan, Chee-Wee; Xu, Tianma; Yeh, Ting-Ting; Bte Abdul Rahman, Fahria; Soon, Benjamin; Gleeson, Nigel; Lane, Judith
Falls efficacy posits an understanding of the perceived ability to prevent and manage falls. There have been no validated self-reported instruments to measure the perceived ability to recover balance in response to destabilizing perturbations. To develop a scale of balance recovery confidence. Stage one had candidate items generated by 12 community-dwelling adults aged 65 and older using the nominal group technique. Stage two had the scale's name, instructions, response options, recall period and the items validated for appropriateness with 28 healthcare professionals and 10 older adults using an e-Delphi technique. Stage three had the scale's psychometric properties evaluated with 84 older adults who had completed self-reported and performance measures. Factor analysis was applied to confirm unidimensionality. The internal structure, reliability and validity of the scale were evaluated using the classical test theory and Rasch measurement theory. The 19-item scale was developed and validated with experts' consensus. The scale is unidimensional with excellent internal structure (Cronbach's α = 0.975) and test-retest reliability with Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC ) = 0.944. Construct validity of the scale was supported by its relationships with the other measures (Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale, Falls Efficacy Scale-International, Late-Life Function and Disability International-Function, handgrip strength dynamometry, 30-second chair stand test, and mini-BESTest). The balance recovery confidence scale is a distinct instrument that measures perceived reactive balance recovery. The scale has good psychometric properties and can be used to complement other measurement instruments to help older adults cope with challenges to balance.
Validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure of balance recovery confidence (BRC) for community-dwelling older adults: A study protocol
(Taylor & Francis, 2021-06-18) Soh, Shawn Leng-Hsien; Lane, Judith; Gleeson, Nigel; Xu, Tianma; Bte Abdul Rahman, Fahria; Yeh, Ting-Ting; Soon, Benjamin; Tan, Chee-Wee
Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide clinicians a greater understanding of patients’ perceived ability in their physical performance. Existing PROMs on falls efficacy provide meaningful information about the perceived ability in older people to perform common activities of daily living without falling. However, the perceived ability to recover balance from a slip, a trip, or volitional movements has been inadequately assessed. Balance recovery confidence relates to the judgment of self-reactive ability. The scale of balance recovery confidence (BRC) is a new PROM that measures perceived balance recovery self-efficacy. The purpose of the study protocol is to describe the first psychometric evaluation of BRC’s measurement properties.