POS0181 HOW FIT ARE THE SOCIAL SUPPORT INSTRUMENTS USED IN RMDS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF VALIDATION STUDIES
Authors: D. De Cock, D. Benavent, L. Falzon, S. Ramiro, L. Carmona
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2021)

Background: Rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) diminish psychosocial well-being. Social support (SS) is considered to improve this psychosocial wellbeing. Therefore, SS is an important construct to measure in RMDs. Objectives: To systematically review and summarize the psychometric properties of SS instruments developed or validated in RMDs. Methods: A comprehensive search in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Epistemonikos was performed from inception to June 8, 2020, with the aid of an experienced librarian (LF). Two researchers (DDC and DB) independently screened articles on title+abstract and next on full text. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed for additional references. Articles were included if covering psychometric properties (detailed in the Table 1) of SS instruments used in RMDs. Studies on questionnaires lacking an English version, unpublished material, case reports, editorials, letters, or reviews were excluded. Risk of bias of studies and instruments was assessed via the COSMIN checklist. Table 1. psychometric properties per social support instrument Instrument Face validity Content Validity Structural validity Criterion validity Internal consistency Reliability Measurement error Hypothesis testing for construct validity Cross-cultural validity/Measurement invariance Responsiveness AIMS 4 4 4 4 4 AIMS2 4 4 4 4 4 4 AIMS2-SF 4 4 4 Brief Screening Questions 4 4 4 Dyadic Efficacy Scale 4 4 4 4 EIS 4 4 4 4 Flanagan QOL 4 4 4 4 FS 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 IRGL 4 4 4 4 4 ISSI 4 4 4 LISRES 4 4 4 MEPS 4 4 4 4 4 4 MWA 4 4 4 OAKHQOL 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 e-OAKHQOL 4 4 4 Mini-OAKHQOL 4 4 4 4 4 4 PFSSADI 4 4 4 4 RASP 4 4 4 4 SIP 4 4 SPQ 4 4 4 4 SSQT 4 4 4 4 4 Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS); Short Form (SF); Emotional Intimacy Scale (EIS); Quality of Life (QOL); Friendship Scale (FS); Impact on Rheumatic diseases and General health and Lifestyle (IRGL); Interview Schedule for Social Interactions (ISSI); Life Stressors and Social Resources Inventory (LISRES); Medical Issues, Exercise, Pain, and Social Support (MEPS); Modified Work APGAR (MWA); Osteoarthritis Knee and Hip Quality of Life (OAKHQOL); preferences for formal social support of autonomy and dependence in pain inventory (PFFSADI); Responses and Attitudes to Support during Pain questionnaire (RASP); Sickness Impact Profile (SIP); Social support and Pain Questionnaire (SPQ); Social Support Questionnaire for Transactions (SSQT). Results: From 4986 articles captured, 30 met the predefined inclusion criteria. These articles included 21 SS instruments used in 8 RMDs, mainly rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. Table 1 shows the psychometric properties per instrument. Construct validity, structural validity, and internal consistency were assessed for most instruments, while measurement invariance, measurement error, criterion validity and responsiveness in ≤3 instruments each. Development and content validity of the instruments gave consistently high risk of bias by the COSMIN checklist. The most widely validated instruments were the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS) and the Osteoarthritis Knee and Hip Quality of Life (OAKHQOL), with their respective derived instruments (AIMS2, AIMS2-SF, mini-OAKHQOL and e-OAKHQOL). For the AIMS SS scale, internal consistency ranged between 0.33-0.69 (Cronbach’s α) and test-retest reliability was estimated 0.92 (Guttman reproducibility coefficient). For the OAKHQOL SS scale, internal consistency ranged between 0.78-0.81 (Cronbach’s α) and test-retest reliability ranged between 0.5-0.85 (ICC). Responsiveness was only investigated in AIMS and the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) instrument. Relative efficiency for SS for the SIP was considerably higher than for AIMS (0.74 vs 0.18). Conclusion: This review gives a summary of the psychometric properties of SS instruments in RMDs. Most instruments show sufficient structural validity internal consistency and reliability, but some psychometric properties such as criterion validity, measurement error and invariance, need to be investigated before choosing an optimal SS instruments. Disclosure of Interests: None declared