Systematic review of the psychometric properties and theoretical grounding of instruments evaluating self-care in people with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Authors

  • Jorge Caro-Bautista MSN RN,

    Nursing Coordinator/PhD Student/Associate Researcher, Corresponding author
    1. District of Primary Health Care of Málaga, Department of Nursing and Podiatry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Malaga, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Francisco Javier Martín-Santos MPH RN,

    Director of Nursing/Associate Lecturer
    1. District of Primary Health Care of Malaga, Department of Nursing and Podiatry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Malaga, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jose Miguel Morales-Asencio BSc PhD RN

    Director
    1. Department of Nursing and Podiatry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Malaga, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Aim

To determine the psychometric properties and theoretical grounding of instruments that evaluate self-care behaviour or barriers in people with type 2 diabetes.

Background

There are many instruments designed to evaluate self-care behaviour or barriers in this population, but knowledge about their psychometric validation processes is lacking.

Design

Systematic review.

Data sources

We conducted a search for psychometric or validation studies published between January 1990–December 2012. We carried out searches in Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuolid, BibliPRO and Google SCHOLAR to identify instruments that evaluated self-care behaviours or barriers to diabetes self-care.

Review methods

We conducted a systematic review with the following inclusion criteria: Psychometric or clinimetric validation studies that included patients with type 2 diabetes (exclusively or partially) and which analysed self-care behaviour or barriers to self-care and proxies like self-efficacy or empowerment, from a multidimensional approach. Language: Spanish or English. Two authors independently assessed the quality of the studies and extracted data using Terwee's proposed criteria: psychometrics properties, dimensionality, theoretical ground and population used for validation through each included instrument.

Results

Sixteen instruments achieved the inclusion criteria for the review. We detected important methodological flaws in many of the selected instruments. Only the Self-management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes and Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale met half of Terwee's quality criteria.

Conclusion

There are no instruments for identifying self-care behaviours or barriers elaborated with a strong validation process. Further research should be carried out to provide patients, clinicians and researchers with valid and reliable instruments that are methodologically solid and theoretically grounded.

Ancillary