Premium
Intermittent catheterization acceptance test (I‐CAT): A tool to evaluate the global acceptance to practice clean intermittent self‐catheterization
Author(s) -
GuinetLacoste Amandine,
Kerdraon Jacques,
Rousseau Alexandra,
Gallien Philippe,
Previnaire JeanGabriel,
PerrouinVerbe Brigitte,
Amarenco Gérard
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
neurourology and urodynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1520-6777
pISSN - 0733-2467
DOI - 10.1002/nau.23195
Subject(s) - construct validity , debriefing , medicine , anxiety , face validity , cronbach's alpha , test anxiety , test (biology) , clinical psychology , confirmatory factor analysis , physical therapy , psychometrics , psychiatry , medical education , structural equation modeling , paleontology , statistics , mathematics , biology
Aim In certain cases, a patient's anxiety, fear, or misconceptions can represent significant obstacles to the learning of Clean Intermittent Self Catheterization (CISC), and little is known about these psychological barriers. The aim of the present study is thus to construct and validate an “Intermittent Catheterization Acceptance Test (I‐CAT)” to evaluate the psychological acceptance of CISC. Methods A study was carried out in nine neuro‐rehabilitation and urology departments in French university hospitals. Fifty‐five items were identified, following a comprehensive review of the literature and cognitive debriefing interviews with patients. Following an initial expert panel meeting (EPM) with a French‐speaking neuro‐urology study group (GENULF), this list was refined and reduced to a draft I‐CAT comprising 34 items. The face validity of the draft I‐CAT was determined, and the results were then analyzed in a second EPM, leading to the elaboration of a second version of the I‐CAT (23 items, 5 dimensions). Psychometric validation of this second version was established from a longitudinal, non‐randomized study involving 201 neurological and non‐neurological patients. Linguistic validation was carried out in English. Results Following the construct validity analyses, several items were deleted due to item overlap, ceiling effects, or poor content validity and 14 items were retained. Confirmatory factor analysis shows that this version has 2 dimensions. Cronbach's alpha was 0.93. The ICC demonstrated good test‐retest reliability and satisfactory responsiveness. Conclusion The upstream identification and solving of potential psychological barriers prior to the learning of CISC could improve patients’ acceptance of this procedure.