4.5 Article

Development and validation of the therapeutic alliance in physiotherapy questionnaire for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 104, 期 3, 页码 524-531

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.09.024

关键词

Therapeutic alliance; Physiotherapy; Musculoskeletal pain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a new self-administered questionnaire (CAF-P) for measuring therapeutic alliance in physiotherapy, which demonstrates good internal consistency and construct validity. The questionnaire appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the therapeutic alliance perceived by patients in physiotherapy.
Objective: The purpose of this study is to present the development and analysis of the factorial structure and psychometric properties of a new self-administered questionnaire (Therapeutic Alliance in Physiotherapy Questionnaire-Patients [CAF-P]) designed to measure therapeutic alliance in physiotherapy. Methods: The sample included 204 patients with chronic pain attending nine primary care centres. The CAF-P was developed and validated using standard methodology, which included developing items, cognitive debriefing and psychometric validation. Results: CAF-P has excellent internal consistency, with Cronbach's a of 0.91 and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87. We propose a structure of two factors that explain 55.80 % of the variance. The convergent validity showed a moderate positive correlation with the probability of recommending treatment and with the level of satisfaction. Conclusions: The CAF-P appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the therapeutic alliance perceived by patients in physiotherapy. Practice implications: The results of the present study leads to further research to identify the differences in the therapeutic alliance construct between different settings or professions. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据