Exploring the Psychometric Properties of the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8 in Adolescents

in Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $76.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $101.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $144.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $192.00

Context: Patient-reported outcomes are widely used in health care. The Disablement in the Physically Active (DPA) Scale Short Form-8 (SF-8) was recently proposed as a valid scale for the physically active population. However, further psychometric testing of the DPA SF-8 has not been completed, and scale structure has not been assessed using a sample of adolescent athletes. Objective: To assess scale structure of the DPA SF-8 in a sample of adolescent high-school athletes. Main Outcome Measure(s): Adolescent athletes (n = 289) completed the DPA SF-8. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the psychometric properties of the scale. Results: The CFA of the DPA SF-8 indicated that the model exceeded recommended fit indices (Comparative Fit Index = .976, Tucker–Lewis Index = .965, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = .061, and Bollen’s Incremental Fit Index = .976). All factor loadings were significant and ranged from .62 to .86. Modification indices did not suggest that meaningful cross-loadings were present or additional specifications that could further maximize fit or parsimony. Conclusions: The CFA of the DPA SF-8 met contemporary model fit recommendations in the adolescent athlete population. The results confirmed initial findings supporting the psychometric properties of the DPA SF-8 as well as the uniqueness of the quality-of-life and physical summary factors in an adolescent population. Further research (eg, reliability, invariance between groups, minimal clinically important differences, etc) is warranted to inform scale use in clinical practice and research.

The authors are with the University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA.

Baker (russellb@uidaho.edu) is corresponding author.
  • 1.

    Black N. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ. 2013;346:f167. PubMed ID: 23358487 doi:

  • 2.

    Nelson EC, Eftimovska E, Lind C, Hager A, Wasson JH, Lindblad S. Patient reported outcome measures in practice. BMJ. 2015;350:g7818. PubMed ID: 25670183 doi:

  • 3.

    Peroutka CR. Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Physically Active Population [dissertation]. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University; 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Valovich McLeod TC, Snyder AR, Parsons JT, Curtis Bay R, Michener LA, Sauers EL. Using disablement models and clinical outcomes assessment to enable evidence-based athletic training practice, part II: clinical outcomes assessment. J Athl Train. 2008;43(4):437445. PubMed ID: 18668177 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Vela LI, Denegar C. Transient disablement in the physically active with musculoskeletal injuries, part I: a descriptive model. J Athl Train. 2010;45(6):615629. PubMed ID: 21062186 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Vela LI, Denegar CR. The Disablement in the Physically Active Scale, part II: the psychometric properties of an outcomes scale for musculoskeletal injuries. J Athl Train. 2010;45(6):630641. PubMed ID: 21062187 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Houston MN, Hoch JM, Van Lunen BL, Hoch MC. The development of summary components for the Disablement in the Physically Active scale in collegiate athletes. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(11):26572662. PubMed ID: 26003315 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Baker RT, Burton D, Pickering MA, Start A. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale and preliminary testing of short-form versions: a calibration and validation study. J Athl Train. 2019;54(3):302318. PubMed ID: 30741563 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Baker RT, Casanova MP, Pickering MA, Baker JG. Invariance testing of the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale. J Athl Train. In press. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 4th ed. New York, NY: Guilford Publications; 2015.

  • 11.

    US Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Hoch JM, Druvenga B, Ferguson BA, Houston MN, Hoch MC. Patient-reported outcomes in male and female collegiate soccer players during an athletic season. J Athl Train. 2015;50(9):930936. PubMed ID: 26207439 doi:

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Zullig KJ, Valois RF, Drane JW. Adolescent distinctions between quality of life and self-rated health in quality of life reports. Health and Qual of Life Outcomes. 2005;3(64):19. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Bryant FB, Yarnold PR. Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In: Grimm LG, Yarnold PR (eds.) Reading and Understanding Multivariate Statistics. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1995:99136.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 133 133 21
Full Text Views 24 24 1
PDF Downloads 5 5 2