Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Exercise Benefits/ Barriers Scale: Perceived exercise benefits and barriers of patients with different axial spondyloarthritis subtypes
Devrim Can Sarac1
, Elif Durak Ediboglu2, Derya Ozer Kaya1, Gozde Duran3, Emre Alp Akatay4, Sercan Gucenmez5, Servet Akar2, Deniz Bayraktar1
1Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye
2Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye
3Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, Türkiye
4Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Institute of Health Sciences, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye
5Rheumatology Clinic, Atatürk Training and Research Hospital, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, İzmir, Türkiye
Keywords: Arthritis, exercise, patient reported outcome, reliability, validity.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to translate the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale (EBBS) into Turkish and investigate the perceptions of Turkish-speaking patients with different axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) subtypes regarding exercise benefits and barriers.
Patients and methods: This validation study was conducted between June 2018 and December 2021. Patients with axSpA were consecutively assessed regarding physical (age, sex and body mass index) and disease-related characteristics (disease activity, spinal mobility, functional status, quality of life, health status, emotional status, and kinesiophobia). Eligible participants were asked to complete the EBSS and other outcome measurements during their initial visits. EBBS was readministered 7 to 14 days later.
Results: One hundred forty-eight patients (89 males, 59 females; mean age: 44.3±11.8 years; range, 19 to 65 years) were included in the study. Of the patients, 108 had radiographic axSpA, and 40 had nonradiographic axSpA. EBBS-Barriers and EBBS-Benefits subscales demonstrated adequate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas of 0.82 and 0.95, respectively) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.837 and 0.807, respectively). No significant differences were observed between axSpA subtypes regarding EBBS-Barriers (p=0.12) and EBBS-Benefits (p=0.10) subscales. Significant relationships were detected between kinesiophobia and EBBS-Barriers scores (r=–0.424, p<0.01), as well as EBBS-Benefits scores (r=–0.344, p<0.01) for all patients. EBBS-Benefits scores were correlated to health status (r=–0.412, p=0.08) and quality of life (r=–0.394, p=0.01) in patients with nonradiographic axSpA.
Conclusion: According to our results, the Turkish EBBS is a valid and reliable tool for patients with axSpA. Perceptions of the patients with axSpA regarding exercise barriers and benefits do not differ according to the disease subtype. It appears that kinesiophobia may be an important parameter regarding exercise perception in axSpA.
Citation: Sarac DC, Durak Ediboglu E, Ozer Kaya D, Duran G, Akatay EA, Gucenmez S, et al. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale: Perceived exercise benefits and barriers of patients with different axial spondyloarthritis subtypes. Arch Rheumatol 2024;39(3):447-458. doi: 10.46497/ ArchRheumatol.2024.10720.