z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Can Optimism, Pessimism, Hope, Treatment Credibility and Treatment Expectancy Be Distinguished in Patients Undergoing Total Hip and Total Knee Arthroplasty?
Author(s) -
Tsjitske M. Haanstra,
C. Tilbury,
Steven J. Kamper,
R. Tordoir,
T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland,
Rob G. H. H. Nelissen,
Pim Cuijpers,
Henrica C. W. de Vet,
Joost Dekker,
Dirk L. Knol,
Raymond Ostelo
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0133730
Subject(s) - pessimism , optimism , confirmatory factor analysis , expectancy theory , credibility , psychology , life expectancy , variance (accounting) , explained variation , physical therapy , clinical psychology , structural equation modeling , medicine , social psychology , statistics , mathematics , population , political science , philosophy , environmental health , epistemology , accounting , law , business
Objectives The constructs optimism, pessimism, hope, treatment credibility and treatment expectancy are associated with outcomes of medical treatment. While these constructs are grounded in different theoretical models, they nonetheless show some conceptual overlap. The purpose of this study was to examine whether currently available measurement instruments for these constructs capture the conceptual differences between these constructs within a treatment setting. Methods Patients undergoing Total Hip and Total Knee Arthroplasty (THA and TKA) (Total N = 361; 182 THA; 179 TKA), completed the Life Orientation Test-Revised for optimism and pessimism, the Hope Scale, the Credibility Expectancy Questionnaire for treatment credibility and treatment expectancy. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine whether the instruments measure distinct constructs. Four theory-driven models with one, two, four and five latent factors were evaluated using multiple fit indices and Δχ 2 tests, followed by some posthoc models. Results The results of the theory driven confirmatory factor analysis showed that a five factor model in which all constructs loaded on separate factors yielded the most optimal and satisfactory fit. Posthoc, a bifactor model in which (besides the 5 separate factors) a general factor is hypothesized accounting for the commonality of the items showed a significantly better fit than the five factor model. All specific factors, except for the hope factor, showed to explain a substantial amount of variance beyond the general factor. Conclusion Based on our primary analyses we conclude that optimism, pessimism, hope, treatment credibility and treatment expectancy are distinguishable in THA and TKA patients. Postdoc, we determined that all constructs, except hope, showed substantial specific variance, while also sharing some general variance.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom