Self-efficacy measurement instruments for individuals with coronary artery disease: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decade, there has been a heightened interest in evaluating self-efficacy among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). A significant number of instruments have been developed and validated, yet the need remains to assess the quality of their studies and their properties. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the measurement properties and link the content extracted from self-efficacy instrument items for individuals with CAD to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). METHODOLOGY: The study was conducted following the Cochrane systematic review guidelines and COnsensus norms for Selection of health Measuring INstruments (COSMIN), registered under CRD42021262613. The search was carried out on MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, including studies involving the development and validation of self-efficacy instruments for individuals with CAD, without language or date restrictions. Data extraction was performed in May 2022 and updated in January 2023 and all the steps of this review were carried out by two different collaborators and reviewed by a third when there were divergences. Modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) recommended by COSMIN was used to determine the quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. Instrument categorization was carried out per COSMIN recommendations, according to the construct of interest and study population into three categories (A, B, or C). RESULTS: A total of 21 studies from 12 instruments were identified. The best-rated instruments received a recommendation of B, which means, additional validation studies are needed. Barnason Efficacy Expectation Scale (BEES) showed high-quality evidence for structural, construct, criterion, and internal consistency validity; Cardiac Self-Efficacy Scale (CSES) demonstrated high quality for content, structural, cross-cultural validity, and internal consistency; Self-efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use (SEAMS) achieved a high level for structural, criterion, and internal consistency validity; Cardiovascular Management Self-Efficacy Scale exhibited high-level validity for structural, criterion, construct, and internal consistency. The CSES showed content linkage with all domains of the ICF, as well as the highest number of linkages with the categories. CONCLUSIONS: Instruments with a B-level recommendation hold potential for use. More studies assessing measurement properties are needed to reinforce or improve these recommendations. The CSES stands out as the most comprehensive instrument concerning the ICF.

Self-efficacy instruments for individuals with coronary artery disease: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Self-efficacy is associated with management of diseases, psychological well-being, improved quality of life and rehabilitation adherence. Several instruments related to behaviour or specific disease (eg, coronary artery disease (CAD)) assess self-efficacy. The evaluation of cardiac self-efficacy in individuals with CAD will support healthcare professionals to improve self-efficacy via interventions; therefore, a suitable instrument is crucial. This systematic review aims to assess measurement properties, methodological quality and content of outcome measures of cardiac self-efficacy instruments for individuals with CAD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study has been developed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol and Consensus Norms for Selection of Health Measuring Instruments (COSMIN). The following databases will be searched: MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Studies assessing measurement properties of cardiac self-efficacy instruments for individuals with CAD will be included. No date or language restrictions will be applied to the search. Two independent authors will be responsible for assessing the eligibility of studies. Methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the COSMIN RoB Checklist, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Assessment will be used to assess the quality of each study. Two authors will independently evaluate the content of instruments and link this to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not require ethics committee approval since it is based on previously published data. Evidence from this systematic review will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at scientific conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021262613.