Validity of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: a comparison between two countries.
OBJECTIVE
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.


METHODS
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.


CONCLUSIONS
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.
Kersten
Paula
P
School of Health Professions and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. P.Kersten@soton.ac.uk
Cardol
Mieke
M
George
Steve
S
Ward
Christopher
C
Sibley
Andrew
A
White
Barney
B
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002908:Chronic Disease / Q000523:psychology / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D003431:Cross-Cultural Comparison; D004739:England; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands; D010358:Patient Participation; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires