title: Measuring the impact of health problems among adults with limited mobility in Thailand: further validation of the Perceived Impact of Problem Profile.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The Perceived Impact of Problem Profile (PIPP) was developed to provide a tool for measuring the impact of a health condition from the individual's perspective, using the ICF model as a framework. One of the aims of the ICF is to enable the comparison of data across countries, however, relatively little is known about the subjective experience of disability in middle and low-income countries. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the Perceived Impact of Problem Profile (PIPP) for use among adults with a disability in Thailand using Rasch analysis.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 210 adults with mobility impairment from the urban, rural and remote areas of northeast Thailand completed the PIPP, which contains 23 items assessing both impact and distress across five key domains (Self-care, Mobility, Participation, Relationships, and Psychological Well-being). Rasch analysis, using RUMM2020, was conducted to assess the internal validity and psychometric properties of the PIPP Impact subscales. Validation of the PIPP Impact scales was conducted by comparing scores across the different response levels of the EQ5D items.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Rasch analysis indicated that participants did not clearly differentiate between 'impact' and 'distress,' the two aspects assessed by the PIPP. Further analyses were therefore limited to the PIPP Impact subscales. These showed adequate psychometric properties, demonstrating fit to the Rasch model and good person separation reliability. Preliminary validity testing using the EQ5D items provided support for the PIPP Impact subscales.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results provide further support for the psychometric properties of the PIPP Impact scales and indicate that it is a suitable tool for use among adults with a locomotor disability in Thailand. Further research is needed to validate the PIPP across different cultural contexts and health conditions and to assess the usefulness of separate Impact and Distress subscales.
authors.affiliation: School of Rural Health, University of Melbourne, 49 Graham Street, Shepparton, 3630, Victoria, Australia. roseanne.misajon@med.monash.edu.au
authors.forename: RoseAnne
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Misajon
authors.forename: Julie F
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Pallant
authors.forename: Lenore
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Manderson
authors.forename: Siriporn
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Chirawatkul
mesh_terms: D000203:Activities of Daily Living; D000328:Adult; D001007:Anxiety; D003863:Depression; D006233:Persons with Disabilities / Q000523:psychology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D051346:Mobility Limitation; D011594:Psychometrics / Q000295:instrumentation*; D011788:Quality of Life; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D018434:Sickness Impact Profile; D012919:Social Behavior; D013315:Stress, Psychological; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D013785:Thailand