Abstract
Background
Prior psychometric evidence of the Physical Resilience Instrument for Older Adults (PRIFOR) showed good criterion-related validity, concurrent validity, known-group validity, predictive validity, and internal consistency. However, it is unclear whether older patients with different treatment diagnoses interpret the PRIFOR similarly.
Aims
This study aimed to test the psychometric properties of the PRIFOR scores among different treatment diagnoses of older patients.
Methods
We recruited 413 hospitalized older patients with a medical diagnosis and 207 with a surgical diagnosis in a 1343-bed tertiary-care medical center in Taiwan. Data analyses included Rasch models, Principal Components Analysis (PCA), and Pearson correlations.
Results
The Rasch analyses showed that all PRIFOR items were embedded within their belonged constructs, reflecting good construct validity and unidimensionality. Person and item separation reliability support the internal consistency of the studied samples and PRIFOR items. However, six PRIFOR items were found to have meaningful differential item functioning (DIF) problems among treatment diagnoses.
Conclusions
The PRIFOR is a solid measurement and can be used for monitoring the status of older adults’ physical resilience. However, because six items were found to have meaningful DIF among treatment diagnosis groups, future studies should consider designing specific items for different patient populations to assess their needs in physical resilience.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.
References
United Nations: World population prospects. https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_results.pdf. Accessed 30 Mar 2023
World Health Organization: World report on ageing and health https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/186463. Accessed 30 Mar 2023
Hadley EC, Kuchel GA, Newman AB et al (2017) Report: NIA workshop on measures of physiologic resiliencies in human aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 72:980–990
Whitson HE, Duan-Porter W, Schmader KE et al (2016) Physical resilience in older adults: systematic review and development of an emerging construct. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 71:489–495
Chhetri JK, Ma L, Chan P (2022) Physical resilience: a novel approach for healthy aging. J Frailty Sarcopenia Falls 7:29–31
Hu FW, Lin CH, Yueh FR et al (2022) Development and psychometric evaluation of the physical resilience instrument for older adults (PRIFOR). BMC Geriatr 22:229
Hu FW, Lin CH, Lai PH et al (2021) Predictive validity of the physical resilience instrument for older adults (PRIFOR). J Nutr Health Aging 25:1042–1045
Lin CY, Ou SH, Chang CM et al (2023) The physical resilience instrument for older adults (PRIFOR) in surgical inpatients: further evidence for its factor structure and validity. J Frailty Aging 12:91–96
Tractenberg RE (2010) Classical and modern measurement theories, patient reports, and clinical outcomes. Contemp Clin Trials 31:1–3
Jabrayilov R, Emons WHM, Sijtsma K (2016) Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory in individual change assessment. Appl Psychol Meas 40:559–572
Pfeiffer E (1975) A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 23:433–441
Linacre JM (2002) Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness. J Appl Meas 3:85–106
Linacre JM (2022) A user’s guide to WINSTEPSVR MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs program manual 5.3.1. Winsteps.com., Chicago (IL)
Hagell P (2014) Testing rating scale unidimensionality using the principal component analysis (PCA)/t-test protocol with the Rasch model: the primacy of theory over statistics. Open J Stat 4:456–465
Jones RN (2019) Differential item functioning and its relevance to epidemiology. Curr Epidemiol Rep 6:174–183
Martinková P, Drabinová A, Liaw YL et al (2017) Checking equity: Why differential item functioning analysis should be a routine part of developing conceptual assessments. CBE Life Sci Educ 16:rm2
Boone WJ, Staver JR, Yale MS (2013) Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Springer, New York
Sibbern T, Sellevold VB, Steindal SA et al (2017) Patients’ experiences of enhanced recovery after surgery: a systematic review of qualitative studies. J Clin Nurs 26:1172–1188
Yueh FR, Pan JH, Lee HF et al (2023) A qualitative study to explore experience and management strategies for recovery from frailty in older patients. J Nurs Res 31:e283
Teng WC (2019) Unbearable burden: the caretakers’ self-perceived burden and counseling interventions. J Long Term Care 23:75–90
Low KCP, Ang SL (2013) Filial piety and CSR. In: Idowu SO, Capaldi N, Zu L et al (eds) Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility. Springer, Berlin, pp 1135–1141
Chen YL (2013) Understanding the Meanings of Children’s Practice of Filial Piety from Outsourcing Parental Care Work: The Examples of Families Hiring Foreign Caregivers. Dissertation, National Chengchi University
Resnick B, Boltz M, Galik E et al (2023) Psychometrics of the physical resilience scale in older adults living with dementia: proxy responses. J Aging Health 35:325–334
Funding
This work was supported by a Grant from the Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST 108-2314-B-006-040).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
C-WF and F-WH conceptualized the study. C-WF, Y-PL, C-YL, and F-WH were responsible for analysis and interpretation of results. C-WF, C-MC, and F-WH contributed substantially to the writing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None reported.
Human and animal rights
Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the participating hospital (IRB No. B-ER-108-064). The procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research ethics committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Fan, CW., Li, YP., Chang, CM. et al. The psychometric properties of the Physical Resilience Instrument for Older Adults (PRIFOR): a Rasch analysis. Aging Clin Exp Res 35, 2721–2728 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-023-02547-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-023-02547-z