Validación de la Escala de Apreciación de Agencia de Autocuidado (ASA) para Costa Rica, para población con enfermedad crónica

Abstract

Introducción. Este artículo presenta los resultados del proceso de validación de apariencia, contenido y consistencia interna de la segunda versión en español de la escala ASA con población adulta costarricense con enfermedad crónica. La teoría de autocuidado desarrollada por Dorothea Orem (1983) acuña el término de la agencia de autocuidado, definida como: “la capacidad de participar en el autocuidado” (p.112), el cual ha sido el fundamento de instrumentos a nivel internacional como la escala de Ejercicio de Agencia de Autocuidado. Método. Fue un estudio descriptivo, cuantitativo y psicométrico, realizado con una muestra de 106 personas.Resultado. En la prueba de Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) dio un índice de 0,65 dato aceptable; la prueba de esfericidad de Bartlett resultó estadísticamente significativa con un valor de p<0,000; 276 gl y un Chi2 de 563,9. De igual forma el estudio factorial mediante el método ACP con rotación Varimax sugirió el análisis con 5 ejes factoriales que explicaron el 56,76% de la varianza total. El Alfa de Cronbach fue 0,84 (84%) lo que significa que el total de los ítems que contempla la escala logran medir un mismo concepto o se correlacionan positivamente.Conclusión: Se logró afirmar que el instrumento cuenta con una adecuada validez de contenido, con propiedades psicométricas válidas y adecuadas, además se demostró una alta confiabilidad.

Validación de escala de Valoración de Agencia de Autocuidado (ASA) en adolescentes chilenos

“…30 On the other hand, the screeplot analysis, demonstrated mainly, a factorial solution of a factor, representative for all items. Different studies, produced factorial solutions that differ from one another, such as the one of Costa Rica, 20 which showed five factors, however, demonstrated such as in this study, that several items present inappropriate loads in some factors. The same is observed in a study conducted in Colombia, 17 which produces a factorial solution of nine factors and that, due to the poor adjustment to the instrument, it is decided to eliminate 5 items (4,6,11,12,20), suggesting a scale with 18 items, and only two factors, without mentioning a theoretical foundation.…”

“…Different studies, produced factorial solutions that differ from one another, such as the one of Costa Rica, 20 which showed five factors, however, demonstrated such as in this study, that several items present inappropriate loads in some factors. The same is observed in a study conducted in Colombia, 17 which produces a factorial solution of nine factors and that, due to the poor adjustment to the instrument, it is decided to eliminate 5 items (4,6,11,12,20), suggesting a scale with 18 items, and only two factors, without mentioning a theoretical foundation. Another study, carried out in diabetics, 31 initially found a solution of seven factors and that after carrying out the screeplot diagram test, they found that only two factors were representative of the data set and after forcing the factorial solution four items were excluded.…”

“…The questions were reviewed and it was verified if those were understandable for the language used in our country, bearing in mind the content that they wanted to measure in its original version. From this analysis, smaller modifications were made in writing the words of the items: 5,9,13,14,17,20, so that they were clearer and understandable for the Chilean population.…”

“…Subsequently we proceeded to the confirmatory factor analysis (AFC), where the model was compared with a factor suggested in the analysis of the graph of sedimentation, as well as in the theory and model of five factors as suggested by the Kaiser´s rule. We also included a factor analysis that excluded items that resulted in low contribution (6,11,20).…”

“…This scale has been used, in different cultures and idioms, as well as in stages of the life cycle and health conditions. 4,[18][19][20][21] Despite its generalized use, some authors, have shown that the original version, has a complex factorial structure that can compromise the construct validity of the original instrument. 22,23 It shows low evidence of its use in adolescents.…”