RESUMO
Interprofessional education requires that two or more professionals learn from and with each other to allow effective collaboration and improve health outcomes. Thus far, the interprofessional collaboration of healthcare students might be assessed using the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS), which is currently not available in its Italian version. This study aimed to provide the intercultural adaptation of the RIPLS in Italian (I-RIPLS) and assess its validity and reliability. A two-phase validation study was performed in 2020, using a single-centre approach in students enrolled in the medical degree, physiotherapy, nursing, and dentistry courses at an Italian-speaking university in Albania. The first phase of the study determined the cross-cultural adaptation of the items by involving two translators who followed a forward and backward translation process. In the second phase, a sample of 414 students was enrolled. The preliminary corrected item-total correlations showed that five items did not show significant item-to-total correlations. Even if their deletion was not mandatory for generating a suitable correlation matrix for factor analysis, the advantages of keeping only items contributing to a more stable measurement with a shorter scale represented the rationale for removing items with non-significant item-to-total correlation from the correlation matrix before testing the dimensionality of the I-RIPLS with factor analysis. The answers from the first 50% of responders (n = 207) were used to determine the most plausible dimensionality of the I-RIPLS by employing an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and the second 50% were used to cross-validate the most plausible dimensionality derived from EFA by employing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models. The most plausible dimensionality from EFA, by acknowledging the interpretation of the scree plot, the eigenvalues greater than 1, a parallel analysis, and the previous theoretical dimensions of the tool had two factors with adequate internal consistency. The CFA confirmed the two-factor solutions and the internal consistency for each domain. The I-RIPLS has 14 items with adequate evidence of validity and reliability. Future research should revise the tool for pursuing cross-cultural multigroup measurement invariance.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for the treatment of noncystic fibrosis bronchiectasis (NCFB) recommend pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), but to date, there are few studies that have proven its effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to examine the effect of PR on pulmonary function tests and exercise capacity. METHOD: The aim of this study was to systematically review the effects of PR in NCFB on (1) forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and (2) exercise capacity evaluated by the 6-min walk test (6MWT) and the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT). This meta-analysis was undertaken according to PRISMA recommendations. RESULTS: This pair-wise meta-analysis included data obtained from studies that enrolled 529 NCFB patients. The FEV1 assessment after PR between the active and control group did not show any significant increase (FEV1 difference 0.084 mL; CI: -0.064, +0.233; p = 0.264), and there was an increasing trend (188 mL; CI: -0 to 0.009, +0.384) at the limits of statistical significance (p = 0.061). Walked distance showed a significant increase in the PR group compared to the control group (ISWT distance difference 070.0 m; CI: 55.2, 84.8; p < 0.001), and this finding was confirmed before and after PR both by the ISWT (68.85 m greater than baseline; CI: 40.52, 97.18; p < 0.001) and by the 6MWT (37.7 m greater than baseline; CI: 20.22, 55.25; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PR improves exercise tolerance in NCFB patients, but it has a modest impact on respiratory function.
