Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Self-maintenance Habits and Preferences in Elderly (SHAPE): reliability of reports of self-care preferencesi n older persons

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims: Self-care preferences can be used in designing programs of care. Yet little has been documented concerning the self-care habits and preferences of older adults. Methods: This study assessed the reliability of reports of self-care preferences and their importance among older adults using the Self-maintenance Habits and Preferences in Elderly (SHAPE) instrument. Twenty community- dwelling seniors completed the SHAPE questionnaire twice within a one- to two-week interval. Percent agreement, both exact and close/partial, was computed to assess the reliability of preference content, and intra-class correlations (ICCs) were used for preference importance. Test and subject factors affecting reliability were also investigated. Results: Exact agreement rate for item content was 73%, and that for close/partial agreement was 93%. Mean ICC for item importance was 0.72. Reliability was greater for dichotomous items than for either ordinal or categorical questions. Reliability of item content varied with number of response options and importance reliability varied with age and IADL status. Conclusions: Information from SHAPE about self-care preferences can be used to plan services for seniors and to individualize care for older persons, especially those transitioning to new living environments or those receiving home care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vogelpohl TS, Beck CK, Heacock P, Mercer SO. “I can do it!” dressing: promoting independence through individualized strategies. J Gerontol Nurs 1996; 22: 39–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Miller RI. Managing disruptive responses to bathing by elderly residents: strategies for the cognitively impaired. J Gerontol Nurs 1994; 20: 35–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Degenholtz H, Kane RA, Kivnick HQ. Care-related preferences and values of elderly community-based LTC consumers: can case managers learn what’s important to clients? Gerontologist 1997; 37: 767–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kane RA. Values and preferences. In Kane RL, Kane RA Eds., Assessing Older Persons: Measures, Meaning and Practical Applications. Oxford, England UK: Oxford University Press, 2000: 237–60.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kane RA, Degenholtz H. Assessing values and preferences: should we, can we? Generations 1997; 21: 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Carpenter BD, Van Haitsma K, Ruckdeschel K, Lawton MP. The psychosocial preferences of older adults: a pilot examination of content and structure. Gerontologist 2000; 40: 335–48.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Crogan NL, Evans B, Velasquez D. Measuring nursing home resident satisfaction with food and food service: initial testing of the FoodEx-LTC. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2004; 59: 370–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Evans BC, Crogan NL. Using the FoodEx-LTC to assess institutional food service practices through nursing home residents’ perspectives on nutrition care. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2005; 60: 125–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen-Mansfield J, Jensen B. Sleep-related habits and preferences in older adults: a pilot study of their range and self-rated importance. Behav Sleep Med 2005; 3: 209–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen-Mansfield J, Jensen B. Dressing and grooming preferences of community-dwelling older adults. J Gerontol Nurs, in press.

  11. Cohen-Mansfield J, Jensen B. The preference and importance of bathing, toileting and mouth care habits in older persons. Gerontology 2005; 51: 375–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Campbell KA, Rohlman DS, Storzbach D, et al. Test-retest reliability of psychological and neurobehavioral tests self-administered by computer. Assessment 1999; 6: 21–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Herrmann N. Retrospective information from questionnaires. II. Intrarater reliability and comparison of questionnaire types. Am J Epidemiol 1985; 121: 948–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lam CLK, Lauder IJ, Lam DTP. How does a change in the administration method affect the reliability of the COOP/WONCA Charts? Fam Pract 1999; 16: 184–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Fisch GS, Arinami T, Froster-Iskenius U, et al. Relationship between age and IQ among fragile X males: a multicenter study. Am J Med Genet 1991; 38: 481–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Thompson FE, Lamphiear DE, Metzner HL, Hawthorne VM, Oh MS. Reproducibility of reports of frequency of food use in the Tecumseh Diet Methodology Study. Am J of Epidemiol 1987; 125: 658–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Aman MG, Singh NN, Turbott SH. Reliability of the Aberrant Behavior Checklist and the effect of variations in instructions. Am J Ment Defic 1987; 92: 237–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Herrmann N. Retrospective information from questionnaires. I. Comparability of primary respondents and their next-of-kin. Am J Epidemiol 1985; 121: 937–47.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Andresen EM, Catlin TK, Wyrwich KW, Jackson-Thompson J. Retest reliability of surveillance questions on health related quality of life. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003; 57: 339–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Brownson RC, Alavanja MC, Hock ET. Reliability of passive smoke exposure histories in a case-control study of lung cancer. Int J Epidemiol 1993; 22: 804–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Burtner PA, Qualls C, Ortega SG, Morris CG, Scott K. Test-retest reliability of the Motor-Free Visual Perception Test Revised (MVPT-R) in children with and without learning disabilities. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2002; 22: 23–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marx MS, Cohen-Mansfield J, Guralnik JM. Recruiting community-dwelling elderly at risk for physical disability into exercise research. J Aging Phys Act 2003; 11: 229–41.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development. Multidimensional Functional Assessment: The OARS Methodology. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University 1975: 151–208.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lawton MP, Moss M, Fulcomer M, Kleban MH. A research and service oriented multilevel assessment instrument. J Gerontol 1982; 37: 91–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wood W, Quinn JM, Kashy DA. Habits in everyday life: thought, emotion, and action. J Pers Soc Psychol 2002; 83: 1281–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Humble CG, Samet JM, Skipper BE. Comparison of self- and surrogate-reported dietary information. Am J Epidemiol 1984; 119: 86–98.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kolonel LN, Hirohata T, Nomura AMY. Adequacy of survey data collected from substitute respondents. Am J Epidemiol 1977; 106: 476–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Marshall J, Priore R, Haughey B, Rzepka T, Graham S. Spouse-subject interviews and the reliability of diet studies. Am J Epidemiol 1980; 112: 675–83.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Caspi A, Herbener ES. Marital assortment and phenotypic convergence: longitudinal evidence. Soc Biol 1993; 40: 48–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Funder DC., Kolar DC, Blackman MC. Agreement among judges of personality: interpersonal relations, similarity, and acquaintanceship. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995; 69: 656–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaerlev L, Lynge E, Sabroe S, Olsen J. Reliability of data from next-of-kin: results from a case-control study of occupational and lifestyle risk factors for cancer. Am J Ind Med 2003; 44: 298–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Metzner HL, Lamphiear DE, Thompson FE, Oh MS, Hawthorne VM. Comparison of surrogate and subject reports of dietary practices, smoking habits and weight among married couples in the Tecumseh Diet Methodology Study. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 367–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Cohen-Mansfield J, Jensen B. Adequacy of spouses as informants regarding older persons’ self-care practices and their perceived importance. Fam Syst Health, in press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Promotion, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, and Herczeg Institute on Aging at Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Jiska Cohen-Mansfield PhD, ABPP

  2. Research Institute on Aging, A Charles E. Smith Life Community, 6121 Montrose Road, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA

    Jiska Cohen-Mansfield PhD, ABPP & Barbara Jensen

  3. Department of Health Care Sciences and of Prevention and Community Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

    Jiska Cohen-Mansfield PhD, ABPP

Authors
  1. Jiska Cohen-Mansfield PhD, ABPP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiska Cohen-Mansfield PhD, ABPP.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cohen-Mansfield, J., Jensen, B. Self-maintenance Habits and Preferences in Elderly (SHAPE): reliability of reports of self-care preferencesi n older persons. Aging Clin Exp Res 19, 61–68 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325212

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325212

Keywords

Search

Navigation