Pulmonol.
2019;25(6):334---339
www.jou nalpulmonology.o g
ORIGINAL
ARTICLE
Pulmona y
ehabili a ion
adap ed
index
o
sel -e ficacy
(PRAISE)
alida ed
o
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s
Ca a ina
Dua e
San osa,d,∗,
Ana
João
San osb,
Ma ga ida
San osc,
Fá ima
Rod iguesa,d,
C is ina
Bá ba aa,d
aUni e sidade
de
Lisboa,
Faculdade
de
Medicina,
Ins i u o
de
Saúde
Ambien al,
Lisbon,
Po ugal
bIns i u o
Nacional
de
Saúde
Dou o
Rica do
Jo ge,
Depa amen o
de
Epidemiologia,
Lisbon,
Po ugal
cIns i u o
Poli écnico
de
Lisboa,
Escola
Supe io
de
Tecnologia
da
Saúde
de
Lisboa,
Unidade
de
Ensino
e
In es igac¸ão
em
Psicologia
e
Sociologia;
Uni e sidade
de
Lisboa,
Faculdade
de
Psicologia,
Lisbon,
Po ugal
dCen o
Hospi ala
Uni e si á io
Lisboa
No e,
Hospi al
Pulido
Valen e,
Unidade
de
Reabili ac¸ão
Respi a ó ia,
Lisbon,
Po ugal
Recei ed
26
Ma ch
2019;
accep ed
5
June
2019
A ailable
online
18
Sep embe
2019
KEYWORDS
Sel -e ficacy;
PRAISE;
Validi y;
Pulmona y
ehabili a ion
Abs ac
In oduc ion
and
Objec i es:
Recen
upda es
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
highligh
he
impo -
ance
o
pa ien s’
sel -e ficacy
on
long- e m
adhe ence
o
heal h-enhancing
beha io s.
The
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
Adap ed
Index
o
Sel -E ficacy
(PRAISE)
is
an
adap a ion
o
he
Gen-
e al
Sel -E ficacy
Scale.
This
s udy
aimed
o
ansla e,
cul u ally
adap
and
e alua e
eliabili y
and
alidi y
o
PRAISE
in
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s.
Pa ien s
o
Ma e ials
and
Me hods:
Fo wa d-backwa d
ansla ion
and
pilo
es ing
we e
pe -
o med.
Con en
alidi y
was
assessed
by
a
mul idisciplina y
panel
o
expe
judges.
To
e alua e
eliabili y
and
alidi y,
150
espi a o y
ou pa ien s
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
pa icipa ed
in
a
c oss-sec ional
s udy.
Desc ip i e
and
eliabili y
analyses,
and
explo a o y
ac o ial
analysis
using
p incipal
axis
ac o ing,
ollowed
by
oblique
oblimin
ac o
o a ion
we e
conduc ed
o
iden i y
cons uc
alidi y.
IBM®SPSS® e sion
22
was
used
o
pe o m
s a is ical
analysis.
Resul s:
150
pa ien s
wi h
a
mean
age
o
67
yea s,
54%
male
and
83%
cu en ly
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
pa icipa ed
in
he
s udy.
These
included
mainly
Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Disease
pa ien s
(46.7%)
bu
also
B onchiec asis
(20%),
In e s i ial
Lung
Disease
(20%)
and
o he
espi a o y
diseases.
PRAISE
mean
sco e
was
49.
Explo a o y
ac o
analysis
ex ac ion
p o ided
a
4- ac o
solu ion
ha
cumula i ely
explained
52.3%
o
o al
a iance
(F1:
26.6%;
F2:
9.7%;
F3:
8.7%;
F4:
7.3%).
Po uguese
PRAISE
showed
a
eliabili y
o
0.78
(Ch onbach
alpha).
Conclusions:
The
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
showed
adequa e
psychome ic
p ope ies
o
i
o
be
used
as
an
ins umen
o
measu e
sel -e ficacy
as
a
pa ien -cen e ed
ou come
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion.
©
2019
Sociedade
Po uguesa
de
Pneumologia.
Published
by
Else ie
Espa˜
na,
S.L.U.
This
is
an
open
access
a icle
unde
he
CC
BY-NC-ND
license
(h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
∗Co esponding
au ho .
E-mail
add ess:
fi[email p o ec ed]
(C.D.
San os).
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.pulmoe.2019.06.003
2531-0437/©
2019
Sociedade
Po uguesa
de
Pneumologia.
Published
by
Else ie
Espa˜
na,
S.L.U.
This
is
an
open
access
a icle
unde
he
CC
BY-NC-ND
license
(h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Pulmona y
ehabili a ion
adap ed
index
o
sel -e ficacy
(PRAISE)
alida ed
o
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s
335
In oduc ion
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
is
widely
ecognized
as
an
essen-
ial
componen
in
he
in eg a ed
ca e
o
pa ien s
wi h
ch onic
espi a o y
disease.1The
impac
o
his
comp e-
hensi e
in e en ion
can
be
assessed
by
pa ien -cen e ed
ou comes,
mos ly
pe o mance-based,
and
o
a
ce ain
ex en
influenced
by
pa ien s’
pe cei ed
e ficacy.2
Sel -e ficacy
was
defined
by
Albe
Bandu a
as
a
pe -
sonal
cons uc
o
how
success ully
one
can
execu e
a
equi ed
beha io
o
p oduce
a
desi ed
ou come.3Acco d-
ing
o
‘‘Sel -e ficacy
as
a
uni ying
heo y
o
beha io al
change’’,
expec a ions
o
pe sonal
e ficacy
a e
based
on
ou
sou ces
o
in o ma ion:
pe o mance
accomplishmen s
(pe sonal
mas e y
expe ience),
ica ious
expe ience
(social
obse a ion),
e bal
pe suasion
(sugges ion)
and
physio-
logical
s a es
(emo ional
a ousal
and
beha io al
con ol).3
Pe sonal
mas e y
is
he
mos
powe ul
ac o
since
i
enables
sel -pe cep ion
o
he
capaci y
o
pe o m
a
ask.4Al hough
he
cons uc
o
sel -e ficacy
was
o iginally
ela ed
o
spe-
cific
si ua ions,
ecen
app oaches
gene alized
he
concep
sugges ing
ha
gene al
sel -e ficacy
ep esen s
he
confi-
dence
in
one’s
abili y
o
deal
wi h
di e en
demanding
si ua ions.5Sel -e ficacy
is
a
key
concep
in
many
beha -
io
change
amewo ks
such
as
he
Sel -e ficacy
Theo y,
he
T ans heo e ical
Model,
he
Sel -de e mina ion
The-
o y,
he
Theo y
o
Planned
Beha io ,
and
he
Heal h
Belie
Model.6
Highe
sense
o
sel -e ficacy
has
been
ound
o
be
posi i ely
associa ed
wi h:
be e
ou comes
on
mobili y,
ac i i ies
o
daily
li ing,
dep ession
and
quali y
o
li e
in
s oke
pa ien s7;
highe
le els
o
sel -ca e
in
young
adul s
wi h
ype
1
diabe es8;
be e
a endance
and
imp o emen s
in
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion9;
and
educ ion
in
seden a y
ime
ollowing
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
in
people
wi h
Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Disease.10
To
add ess
adap i e
beha io
change,
Pulmona y
Reha-
bili a ion
enhances
sel -e ficacy
h ough
sel -managemen
in e en ions,
de eloping
skills
in
goal
se ing,
p ob-
lem
sol ing,
decision-making,
and
aking
ac ion
in
a
p edefined
ac ion
plan.1,11 Recen
upda es
highligh
he
impo ance
o
pa ien ’s
sel -e ficacy
on
long- e m
adhe -
ence
o
heal h-enhancing
beha io s.1E idence
by
esea ch
is
ha
sel -e ficacy
baseline
assessmen
p o ed
o
be
use ul
o
p edic ing
posi i e
ou comes8o
di ec ing
he
in e en-
ion
o
pa ien
specific
needs,9maximizing
he
ull
benefi s
o
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion.
In
espi a o y
clinical
p ac ice,
sel -e ficacy
has
been
fi s ly
accessed
by
he
COPD
Sel -E ficacy
Scale,
wi h
pa ien s
a ing
on
a
5-poin
Like
scale
he
amoun
o
confidence
in
managing
b ea hing
di ficul ies
in
34
di e se
si ua ions.12 This
scale
p esen s
a
fi e- ac o
s uc u e
(neg-
a i e
e ec ,
in ense
emo ional
a ousal,
physical
exe ion,
wea he /en i onmen al,
and
beha io al
isk
ac o s)
and
a
significan
in e nal
consis ency
(C onbach’s
alpha
=
0.95),11
ye
no
specific
o
he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
con ex .
Fo
his
pu pose,
Vincen
and
co-au ho s
p oposed
he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
Adap ed
Index
o
Sel -E ficacy
(PRAISE).2The
PRAISE
ool
is
an
adap a ion
o
he
Gen-
e al
Sel -E ficacy
Scale
(GSE)
by
Schwa ze
and
Je usalem,5
adding
5
new
specific
i ems
o
he
p e ious
10.
A aújo
and
Mou a
ha e
al eady
alida ed
a
Po uguese
e sion
o
he
GSE,13 ye
he
assessmen
o
such
a
cons uc
emains
o
be
explo ed
in
he
Po uguese
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
se -
ing.
This
s udy
aimed
o:
1)
ansla e
and
cul u ally
adap
he
PRAISE
ool
in o
Eu opean
Po uguese;
2)
e alua e
eliabili y
and
cons uc
alidi y
o
PRAISE
in
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s.
Ma e ial
and
me hods
The
alida ion
o
he
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
was
de eloped
in
wo
phases:
1)
ansla ion
and
c oss-cul u al
adap a ion
ollowing
in e na ional
ecommenda ions14 and
2)
e alua ion
o
eliabili y
and
alidi y
acco ding
o
he
Consensus-based
S anda ds
o
he
selec ion
o
heal h
Mea-
su emen
INs umen s
(COSMIN)
guidelines.15,16
T ansla ion
and
c oss-cul u al
adap a ion
Pe mission
o
ansla e
and
use
PRAISE
was
gi en
by
co -
esponding
au ho
o
he
o iginal
pape
desc ibing
he
ins umen .2As
GSE
has
been
alida ed
in
Po uguese,13 pe -
mission
om
au ho s
was
ob ained
o
in eg a e
he
al eady
ansla ed
answe
key
and
10
i ems
in o
he
o hcoming
PRAISE
ansla ion.
Subsequen ly,
he
p ocess
p oceeded
in
5
s eps:
1)
he
o iginal
5
i ems
om
PRAISE
we e
ans-
la ed
by
2
independen
Po uguese
ansla o s
(p o essional
ce ified
ansla o
and
a
physio he apis
li ing
in
an
English-
speaking
coun y
o
mo e
han
5
yea s);
2)
a
syn hesis
e sion
was
p oposed
by
an
independen
bilingual
ansla-
o
(psychologis
and
ce ified
ansla o );
3)
blind
backwa d
ansla ion
by
2
independen
bilingual
and
bicul u al
ans-
la o s,
li ing
in
an
English-speaking
coun y
o
mo e
han
5
yea s
(medical
doc o
and
an
audi
execu i e
di ec o );
4)
Final
syn hesis
by
a
mul idisciplina y
commi ee
(p e i-
ous
5
independen
ansla o s
and
also
his
s udy’s
main
esea che ,
a
pulmonologis
expe
in
Pulmona y
Rehabili-
a ion,
and
he
au ho
o
he
o iginal
ins umen );
and
5)
a
cogni i e
deb iefing
was
pe o med
by
es ing
and
e- es ing
on
a
sample
o
10
espi a o y
pa ien s
a ending
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion.
Reliabili y
and
alidi y
To
e alua e
empo al
eliabili y,
a
es - e es
o
PRAISE
(a e age
o
8-day
in e al)
was
gi en
o
10
espi a o y
ou pa ien s
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
a
Hospi al
Pulido
Valen e
in
Lisbon,
Po ugal.
Pa icipan s
we e
diagnosed
wi h
di e se
pa hologies
(Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Disease
n
=
2,
As hma
n
=
2,
In e s i ial
Lung
Disease
n
=
2,
B onchiec asis
n
=
2
and
Lung
Cance
n
=
2).
Cons uc
alidi y
included
ac o ial
analysis
and
in e nal
consis ency,
in
a
c oss-sec ional
s udy
wi h
a
con enience
sample
o
150
espi a o y
ou pa ien s
on
Pulmona y
Rehabil-
i a ion
a
Hospi al
Pulido
Valen e
in
Lisbon,
Po ugal.
Sample
size
was
calcula ed
conside ing
he
ecommenda ion
o
a
leas
10
subjec s
pe
i em
o
he
ins umen
scale.14 All
subjec s
ga e
w i en
in o med
consen
and
answe ed
he
Po uguese
PRAISE
ool
adminis e ed
by
a
physio he apis .
S udy
conduc ion
was
app o ed
by
he
E hics
Commi ee
o
336
C.D.
San os
e
al.
Table
1
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
in e -i em
co ela ions.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
1.00
0.34**
0.29**
0.19*
0.32**
0.24**
0.13
0.30**
0.07
0.07
0.24**
0.12
0.24**
0.30**
0.09
2
1.00
0.30**
0.22**
0.32**
0.24**
0.07
0.30**
0.02
0.20**
0.30
0.13
0.21**
0.28**
0.12
3
1.00
0.25**
0.31**
0.37**
0.13
0.23**
0.20**
0.20**
0.17*
0.15*
0.16*
0.38**
0.26**
4
1.00
0.31**
0.32**
0.18**
0.33**
0.09
0.14*
0.07
0.23**
0.11
0.27**
0.28**
5
1.00
0.44**
0.11
0.21**
0.11
0.39**
0.28**
0.17*
0.23**
0.29**
0.25**
6
1.00
0.13
0.30**
0.07
0.30**
0.44**
0.12
0.32**
0.29**
0.23**
7
1.00
0.24**
0.04
0.14*
0.03
0.13
0.12
0.01
0.17*
8
1.00
0.03
0.10
0.27**
0.06
0.26**
0.27**
0.17*
9
1.00
0.11
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.21**
10
1.00
0.31**
0.03
0.35**
0.35**
0.28**
11
1.00
0.07
0.44**
0.26**
0.20**
12
1.00
0.12
0.20**
0.16*
13
1.00
0.19*
0.20**
14
1.00
0.19*
15
1.00
No e:
*p
<
.05;
**p
<
.01.
Cen o
Hospi ala
Uni e si á io
Lisboa
No e,
EPE
and
Cen-
o
Académico
de
Medicina
de
Lisboa
(numbe
46/17),
and
ial
egis e ed
as
NCT03875599
a
clinical ials.go .
S a is ical
analyses
included
p elimina y
desc ip i e
and
eliabili y
analyses
o
he
PRAISE,
including
i em
means,
co ec ed
i em-scale
co ela ions,
scale
means
and
a i-
ances,
and
alpha
eliabili y
coe ficien s.
Cons uc
alidi y
was
examined
h ough
Explo a o y
Fac o ial
Analysis.
(EFA).
The
Kaise ---Meye ---Olkin
(KMO)
measu es
o
sampling
ade-
quacy,
and
Ba le ’s
es
o
sphe ici y
we e
used
o
assess
he
sui abili y
o
he
da a
o
ac o
analysis.17 P incipal
Axis
Fac o ing
was
used
o
pe o m
EFA,
usually
conside ed
mo e
accu a e
since
i
es ima es
common
a iance
and
consid-
e s
e o
a iance.18,19 The
Eigen alue
(g ea e
han
1),
he
cumula i e
pe cen
o
a iance
explained,
and
he
numbe
and
magni ude
o
he
ac o
loadings
de e mined
he
num-
be
o
ac o s
o
be
e ained.
Fac o
o a ion
was
conduc ed
o
maximize
in e p e abili y
and,
because
some
co ela ions
among
ac o s
we e
expec ed,
an
oblique
oblimin
ac o
o a ion
me hod
was
applied.18,19 All
analyses
we e
con-
duc ed
in
IBM®SPSS® e sion
22.
Resul s
Ins umen
The
PRAISE
ool
de eloped
by
Vincen 2is
composed
o
a
o al
o
15
i ems,
combining
10
i ems
om
Schwa ze
and
Je usalem
GSE
scale5and
5
new
specific
i ems
ela ed
o
a
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
p og am.
Each
i em
is
sco ed
om
1
o
4
wi h
a
o al
ange
om
15
o
60,
wi h
highe
sco es
indica ing
highe
le els
o
sel -e ficacy.
I ems
4,
7,
9,
12
and
15
a e
specific
o
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
as
p oposed
by
he
o iginal
au ho s
o
PRAISE.2The
emaining
i ems
a e
in
acco dance
wi h
he
Po uguese
GSE
by
A aújo
and
Mou a.13
The
Po uguese
ool
e sion
o
clinical
p ac ice
is
p o ided
in
appendix
1,
wi h
pe mission
om
PRAISE
o iginal
au ho s.
Pa icipan s
The
150
pa icipan s
had
a
mean
age
o
67
±
1.7
yea s
and
54%
we e
male.
Condi ions
indica ed
o
Pulmona y
Rehabil-
i a ion
we e
Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Disease
(46.7%),
B onchiec asis
(13.3%),
In e s i ial
Lung
Disease
(13.3%),
As hma
(8.7%),
Lung
Cance
Su ge y
(8.0%)
and
o he
es-
pi a o y
condi ions
(15%).
All
pa icipan s
we e
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
ou pa ien s,
83%
cu en ly
in
a
p og am
and
17%
being
ollowed-up.
PRAISE
mean
sco e
and
s anda d
de ia ion
we e
49
±
0.5,
wi h
a
median
o
50
and
ange
alues
o
32
minimum
and
60
maximum.
Reliabili y
The
ela ionship
be ween
he
wo
es ing
pe iods
showed
some
empo al
consis ency
o
PRAISE,
whe he
measu ed
by
Pea son
co ela ion
coe ficien
(0.71)
o
by
In aclass
Co ela ion
Coe ficien
(0.76).
Fo
he
o al
o
he
150
pa icipan s
he
in e -i ems
co -
ela ions
we e
ela i ely
low,
specifically
o
he
i ems
7,
9
and
12
(Table
1).
C onbach’s
coe ficien
was
0.78
and
inc eased
i
i ems
9
and
12
we e
omi ed
om
he
scale
(Table
2).
The
spli -hal
coe ficien
was
0.73
and
analysis
showed
no
significan
di e ences
be ween
he
sco es
o
he
wo
pa s
o
he
ques ionnai e.
Validi y
Be o e
conduc ing
he
EFA,
he
Ba le
sphe ici y
es
and
he
KMO
es
we e
pe o med.
Fac o
analysis
seemed
o
be
adjus ed
o
PRAISE
sco es
as
Ba le ’s
es
o
sphe ici y
eached
s a is ical
significance
(␹2=
296.582,
p
=
0.000)
and
he
KMO
a
alue
o
0.80.
A e
EFA
ex ac ion
he
p o ided
solu ion
conside ed
4
ac o s
ha
accoun ed
o
a
o al
o
explained
a iance
o
52.3%
(Table
3).
Pulmona y
ehabili a ion
adap ed
index
o
sel -e ficacy
(PRAISE)
alida ed
o
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s
337
Table
2
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
i em
o al
s a is ics.
Mean
S anda d
de ia ion
Scale
a iance
i
i em
Dele ed
Co ec ed
i em- o al
co ela ion
C onbach’s
alpha
i
i em
dele ed
1
3.27
0.77
30.02
0.39
0.77
2
3.15
0.70
30.08
0.43
0.77
3
3.31
0.78
29.14
0.49
0.76
4
3.00
0.91
28.55
0.40
0.78
5
3.35
0.73
27.83
0.55
0.76
6
3.37
0.68
28.97
0.56
0.76
7
3.15
0.88
32.14
0.23
0.78
8
3.29
0.72
30.21
0.43
0.77
9
3.39
0.73
32.54
0.09
0.80
10
3.11
0.76
29.09
0.42
0.77
11
2.97
1.02
30.12
0.41
0.77
12
3.64
0.56
31.66
0.19
0.79
13
3.47
0.75
30.26
0.38
0.77
14
3.33
0.77
29.28
0.49
0.77
15
3.27
0.79
29.79
0.40
0.77
Table
3
Explo a o y
ac o ial
analysis
(P incipal
Axis
Fac-
o ing
wi h
oblimin
o a ion).
I ems
Fac o
1
Fac o
2
Fac o
3
Fac o
4
1
0.61
2
0.66
3
0.62
5
0.57
6
0.43
11
0.52
13
0.77
10
0.69
12
0.74
4
0.47
7
0.52
15
0.90
8
0.74
9
0.44
14
0.56
Eigen alue
3.99
1.45
1.31
1.10
Pe cen age
o
a iance
explained
by
each
ac o
26.59
9.67
8.72
7.34
Pe cen age
o
a iance
explained
by
ac o s
52.34
Fac o
1
con ibu ed
wi h
26.6%
o
he
explained
a iance
combining
7
i ems
om
he
o iginal
GSE.
Fac o
2
explained
he
a iance
in
9.7%
and
included
2
i ems
om
each
scale.
Fac o
3
accoun ed
o
8.7%
o
explained
a iance
wi h
3
specific
i ems
om
PRAISE.
The
final
ac o
con ibu ed
wi h
7.3%
o
a iance
and
included
2
i ems
o
GSE
and
1
i em
o
PRAISE.
In
his
ou - ac o
solu ion,
i ems
4
and
7
did
no
fi
as
well
s a is ically
as
o he
i ems;
hese
i ems
appea ed
o
Table
4
Co ela ions
be ween
ac o s
o
he
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE.
Fac o
1
Fac o
2
Fac o
3
Fac o
4
Fac o
1
1
Fac o
2
0.29
1
Fac o
3
0.54
0.33
1
Fac o
4
0.21
0.18
0.11
1
PRAISE
o al
sco e
0.89
0.67
0.64
0.64
be
c oss-loaded
gi en
ha
bo h
p esen ed
loadings
on
o he
ac o s
did
no
di e
mo e
han
0.2.
In
addi ion,
i ems
4,
6
and
9
p esen ed
he
smalle
loaded
alues
in
he
espec-
i e
ac o s
ex ac ed.
The
co ela ion
coe ficien
be ween
ac o s
was
significan
as
shown
on
Table
4.
Discussion
This
s udy
p esen s
a
Po uguese
e sion
o
he
PRAISE
ool
as
a
esul
o
ansla ion
and
c oss-cul u al
adap a ion
by
an
expe
commi ee,
including
he
o iginal
au ho
o
he
ins umen ,
in
acco dance
wi h
in e na ional
ecommen-
da ions.
Au ho s
p o ide
he
Po uguese
Ve sion
o
PRAISE
in
appendix
o
enable
all
Po uguese
speaking
coun ies
o
measu e
sel -e ficacy
as
a
pa ien -cen e ed
ou come
o
Pul-
mona y
Rehabili a ion.
As
PRAISE
measu es
sel -e ficacy
enabling
he
clinician
o
iden i y
impo an
de e minan s
o
success ul
beha -
io
change,1,2 au ho s
applied
such
an
ins umen
o
he
di e si y
o
espi a o y
pa ien s
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a-
ion.
Such
he e ogenei y
may
ha e
con ibu ed
o
di e en
es ing
esul s
compa ed
wi h
he
o iginal
PRAISE
s udy
applied
exclusi ely
o
Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Dis-
ease
pa ien s.
In
his
s udy,
he
eliabili y
es ima ed
o
he
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
was
0.78,
sligh ly
lowe
han
he
one
ound
in
he
o iginal
e sion
o
he
scale,
0.95.2Al hough
one
338
C.D.
San os
e
al.
s udy
has
shown
his
o
be
a
wo-dimensional
scale,20 in
he
p esen
s udy
ou
di e en
ac o s
we e
ound,
sugges ing
disc imina i e
sel -e ficacy
quali ies.
The
fi s
ac o
included
se en
i ems
om
he
GSE
ela ed
wi h
o e all
sel -e ficacy
explaining
26.6%
o
a iance.
The
second
ac o ,
explaining
9.7%
o
a iance,
included
wo
i ems,
one
om
each
scale,
ega ding
indi iduals’
belie
abou
hei
own
capaci ies.
The
hi d
ac o
included
h ee
specific
i ems
om
PRAISE,
all
desc ibing
pe o mance
accomplishmen ,
explaining
8.7%
o
a iance.
Finally,
he
ou h
ac o
included
wo
i ems
o
GSE
and
one
PRAISE
i em,
oge he
ocus
on
a ionale
o
coping,
as
ei he
a
ai
o
s a egy,
explaining
7.3%
o
a iance.
O e all,
he
Po uguese
PRAISE
e sion
explained
52.3%
o
he
a iance.
While
EFA
solu ions
ha
accoun
o
60%
o
he
o al
a iance
can
be
conside ed
sa is ac-
o y,
i
is
no
uncommon
o
achie e
in e io
alues
o
mul idimensional
cons uc s.18,19 In
ac ,
in
his
pe spec-
i e,
Bandu a
elegan ly
explained
how
expec a ions
o
pe sonal
e ficacy
a e
dynamic
and
may
a y
in
magni-
ude,
gene ali y
o
s eng h.3The
esul s
also
indica e
ha
some
i ems
may
no
be
con ibu ing
significan ly
o
he
measu ed
cons uc .
None heless,
conside ing
ha
he
o e all
ac o
s uc u e
is
concep ually
plausible,
he
PRAISE
p esen s
i sel
as
a
p ac ical
and
scien ifically
use ul
ins umen .
The
ac
ha
i
was
a
con enience
sample
wi h
all
pa ien s
a ending
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
a
he
same
cen e
may
be
a
s udy
limi a ion.
In
addi ion,
di e ences
in
he
ehabili a ion
p og am
o
clinical
condi ions
may
ha e
had
an
e ec
on
how
he
indi iduals
pe cei ed
hei
sel -
e ficacy
in
ega ds
o
he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
p og am.
Hence,
u u e
s udies
should
e alua e
he
eliabili y
and
alidi y
o
PRAISE
o
specific
pa ien
g oups.
Gi en
he
lack
o
e idence
published
abou
he
o ig-
inal
PRAISE
ac o
s uc u e,2 hese
findings
emain
o
be
compa ed
wi h
u he
s udies.
The
ou - ac o
s uc-
u e
p oposed
enables
u u e
s udies
o
PRAISE
cons uc
con e gen
alidi y,
by
a
c oss-sec ional
compa ison
o
sco es
o
o he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
ins umen s
wi h
PRAISE
esul s,16,21 such
as
hose
p esen ed
by
Vincen 2
and
Song.20 Fu he mo e,
con inuing
esea ch
on
longi udi-
nal
alidi y
may
inc ease
knowledge
on
clinically
impo an
sel -e ficacy
change
and
PRAISE
esponsi eness.
In
ac ,
some
s udies
al eady
applied
PRAISE
on
a
home-based
Pul-
mona y
Rehabili a ion22 and
sel -managemen
p og am,23
bu
wi h
no
di e ences
when
compa ed
wi h
adi ional
ca e.
Conclusions
The
Po uguese
e sion
o
PRAISE
showed
adequa e
psycho-
me ic
p ope ies
wi h
a
eliabili y
o
0.78
alpha
Ch onbach
and
a
alidi y
o
52.3%
o
explained
o al
a iance.
This
s udy
enables
Po uguese
clinicians
wi h
he
ins umen
o
measu e
sel -e ficacy
as
a
pa ien -cen e ed
ou come
on
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion,
in
acco dance
wi h
in e na ional
guidelines.
Funding
This
wo k
was
suppo ed
by
Fundac¸ão
pa a
a
Ciência
e
Tec-
nologia
(FCT)
and
Nippon
Gases
Po ugal
unde
he
PhD
s uden ship
in
Indus y
g an
PDE/BDE/127785/2016.
Conflic s
o
in e es
The
au ho s
ha e
no
conflic s
o
in e es
o
decla e.
Au ho
con ibu ions
San os
C.
concei ed,
planned
and
execu ed
he
s udy,
pa -
icipa ed
in
he
mul idisciplina y
panel
o
expe
judges,
analyzed
and
in e p e ed
da a,
and
w o e
and
e ised
he
manusc ip .
San os
A.
analyzed
and
in e p e ed
da a,
and
w o e
and
e ised
he
manusc ip .
San os
M.
in e p e ed
da a,
and
w o e
and
e ised
he
manusc ip .
Rod igues
F.
pa icipa ed
in
he
mul idisciplina y
panel
o
expe
judges
and
e ised
c i ically
he
final
e sion
o
he
manusc ip
o
impo an
in ellec ual
con en .
Bá ba a
C.
e ised
c i ically
he
final
e sion
o
he
manusc ip
o
impo an
in ellec ual
con en .
All
au ho s
ha e
ead
and
app o ed
he
manusc ip .
Acknowledgemen s
Au ho s
a e
g a e ul
o
Emma
Vincen ,
José
Cos a,
Fábio
Fe ei a,
Liliana
Dias,
Pa ícia
Mon ei o
and
Ma iana
Ce ejo
o
hei
collabo a ion
as
expe s
on
he
ansla ion
and
c oss-cul u al
adap a ion
o
he
ins umen .
Au ho s
also
hank
he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
Team
o
Hospi al
Pulido
Valen e,
namely
Ana
Filipe,
Paula
Raposo,
Cla a
C uz,
Ma a
San os,
Ru e
Robe o,
Cláudia
Cos a,
Susana
Ga cia,
Ma a
Miguéns
and
Ca la
Bap is a,
o
he
oppo uni y
o
apply
he
ins umen
o
pa ien s
on
ea men .
Appendix
A.
Supplemen a y
da a
Supplemen a y
ma e ial
ela ed
o
his
a icle
can
be
ound,
in
he
online
e sion,
a
doi:h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/
j.pulmoe.2019.06.003.
Re e ences
1.
Sp ui
MA,
Singh
SJ,
Ga ey
C,
ZuWallack
R,
Nici
L,
Roches e
C,
e
al.
An
o ficial
Ame ican
Tho acic
Soci-
e y/Eu opean
Respi a o y
Socie y
s a emen :
key
concep s
and
ad ances
in
pulmona y
ehabili a ion.
Am
J
Respi
C i
Ca e
Med.
2013;188(8):e13---64,
h p://dx.doi.o g/
10.1164/ ccm.201309-1634ST.
2.
Vincen
E,
Sewell
L,
Wagg
K,
Deacon
S,
Williams
J,
Singh
S.
Measu ing
a
change
in
sel -e ficacy
ollowing
pulmona y
ehabili a ion:
an
e alua ion
o
he
PRAISE
ool.
Ches .
2011;140(6):1534---9,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1378/
ches .10-2649.
3.
Bandu a
A.
Sel -e ficacy:
owa d
a
uni ying
heo y
o
beha io al
change.
Psychol
Re .
1977;84(2):191---215.

Pulmona y
ehabili a ion
adap ed
index
o
sel -e ficacy
(PRAISE)
alida ed
o
Po uguese
espi a o y
pa ien s
339
4.
Bandu a
A.
Sel -e ficacy:
he
exe cise
o
con ol.
Basings oke:
W.
H.
F eeman;
1997.
p.
592.
5.
Schwa ze
RJM.
Gene alized
Sel -E ficacy
Scale.
In:
Weinman
JWS,
Johns on
M,
edi o s.
Measu es
in
heal h
psychology:
a
use ’s
po olio
Causal
and
con ol
belie s.
Windso :
NFER-
NELSON;
1995.
p.
35---7.
6.
Downs
DSNC,
Hausenblas
HA,
Rau
EL.
Why
do
people
change
physical
ac i i y
beha iou ?
In:
Nigg
RC,
edi o .
ACSM’s
Beha -
io al
aspec s
o
physical
ac i i y
and
exe cise:
Ame ican
College
o
Spo s
Medicine.
2014.
p.
1---38.
7.
Ko pe shoek
C,
an
de
Bijl
J,
Ha s einsdo i
TB.
Sel -
e ficacy
and
i s
influence
on
eco e y
o
pa ien s
wi h
s oke:
a
sys ema ic
e iew.
J
Ad
Nu s.
2011;67(9):1876---94,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05659.x.
8.
Johns on-B ooks
CH,
Lewis
MA,
Ga g
S.
Sel -e ficacy
impac s
sel -ca e
and
HbA1c
in
young
adul s
wi h
Type
I
diabe es.
Psy-
chosom
Med.
2002;64(1):43---51.
9.
Selzle
AM,
Rodge s
WM,
Be y
TR,
S ickland
MK.
The
impo ance
o
exe cise
sel -e ficacy
o
clinical
ou comes
in
pulmona y
ehabili a ion.
Rehabil
Psychol.
2016;61(4):380---8,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1037/ ep0000106.
10.
Liacos
A,
McDonald
CF,
Mahal
A,
Hill
CJ,
Lee
AL,
Bu ge
AT,
e
al.
The
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
Adap ed
Index
o
Sel -E ficacy
(PRAISE)
ool
p edic s
educ ion
in
seden a y
ime
ollowing
pulmona y
ehabili a ion
in
people
wi h
ch onic
obs uc i e
pulmona y
disease
(COPD).
Physio he apy.
2019;105(1):90---7,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.physio.2018.07.009.
11.
Blacks ock
FC,
La eau
SC,
Nici
L,
ZuWallack
R,
Bou beau
J,
Buckley
M,
e
al.
Ch onic
Obs uc i e
Pulmona y
Disease
Educa ion
in
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion.
An
O ficial
Ame i-
can
Tho acic
Socie y/Tho acic
Socie y
o
Aus alia
and
New
Zealand/Canadian
Tho acic
Socie y/B i ish
Tho acic
Socie y
Wo kshop
Repo .
Ann
Am
Tho ac
Soc.
2018;15(7):769---84,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201804-253WS.
12.
Wigal
JK,
C ee
TL,
Ko ses
H.
The
COPD
Sel -E ficacy
Scale.
Ches .
1991;99(5):1193---6.
13.
Miguel
A aújo
OM.
Es u u a
ac o ial
da
Gene al
Sel -
E ficacy
Scale
(Escala
de
Au o-Eficácia
Ge al)
numa
amos a
de
p o esso es
po ugueses.
Labo a ó io
de
Psicologia.
2011;9(1):95---105.
14.
Sousa
VD,
Rojjanas i a
W.
T ansla ion,
adap a ion
and
al-
ida ion
o
ins umen s
o
scales
o
use
in
c oss-cul u al
heal h
ca e
esea ch:
a
clea
and
use - iendly
guideline.
J
E al
Clin
P ac .
2011;17(2):268---74,
h p://dx.doi.o g/
10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
15.
Mokkink
LB,
Te wee
CB,
Pa ick
DL,
Alonso
J,
S a o d
PW,
Knol
DL,
e
al.
The
COSMIN
checklis
o
assess-
ing
he
me hodological
quali y
o
s udies
on
measu emen
p ope ies
o
heal h
s a us
measu emen
ins umen s:
an
in e na ional
Delphi
s udy.
Qual
Li e
Res.
2010;19(4):539---49,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8.
16.
Mokkink
LB,
Te wee
CB,
Pa ick
DL,
Alonso
J,
S a -
o d
PW,
Knol
DL,
e
al.
The
COSMIN
s udy
eached
in e na ional
consensus
on
axonomy,
e minology,
and
defi-
ni ions
o
measu emen
p ope ies
o
heal h- ela ed
pa ien -
epo ed
ou comes.
J
Clin
Epidemiol.
2010;63(7):737---45,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006.
17.
DeVellis
RF.
Scale
de elopmen :
heo y
and
applica ions.
New-
bu y
Pa k:
SAGE
Publica ions;
1991.
18.
GJ
K.
Explo a o y
ac o
analysis:
heo y
and
applica ion.
Ne he lands:
Rijksuni e si ei
G oningen;
2004.
19.
Cos ello
ABOJ.
Bes
p ac ices
in
Explo a o y
Fac o
Analysis:
ou
ecommenda ions
o
ge ing
he
mos
om
you
analysis.
P ac
Assess
Res
E al.
2005;10(7):1---9.
20.
Song
HY,
Nam
KA.
Psychome ic
p ope ies
o
he
Ko ean
e sion
o
he
Pulmona y
Rehabili a ion
Adap ed
Index
o
Sel -E ficacy
(PRAISE)
o
indi iduals
wi h
COPD.
In
J
Ch on
Obs uc
Pulmon
Dis.
2017;12:2611---20,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.2147/COPD.S142488.
21.
Finch
EBD,
S a o d
P,
Mayo
N.
Why
measu emen
p ope ies
a e
impo an .
In:
F
E,
edi o .
Physical
Rehabili a ion
Ou -
come
Measu es---- a
guide
o
enhanced
clinical
decision
making.
Canada:
Lippinco
Williams
&
Wilkins;
2002.
p.
26---41.
22.
Holland
AE,
Mahal
A,
Hill
CJ,
Lee
AL,
Bu ge
AT,
Cox
NS,
e
al.
Home-based
ehabili a ion
o
COPD
using
minimal
esou ces:
a
andomised,
con olled
equi a-
lence
ial.
Tho ax.
2017;72(1):57---65,
h p://dx.doi.o g/
10.1136/ ho axjnl-2016-208514.
23.
Mi chell
KE,
Johnson-Wa ing on
V,
Apps
LD,
Banka
J,
Sewell
L,
Williams
JE,
e
al.
A
sel -managemen
p og amme
o
COPD:
a
andomised
con olled
ial.
Eu
Respi
J.
2014;44(6):1538---47,
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1183/09031936.00047814.