The Spanish adaptation of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart: psychometric evidence in cardiac rehabilitation patients.
Mercedes Coello-Cremades, Agustín Martínez-Molina, Raúl Ferrer-Peña and 1 others
PMID 39007784WHAT IT FOUND
The Spanish Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart works well as a total score but fails as a four-part breakdown.
Use the overall score to gauge fear of movement in cardiac patients, but do not rely on individual subscales or item-level data for clinical decisions.
Key findings
01The 13-item Spanish version showed acceptable internal consistency for the total score (alpha 0.79) and stable test-retest reliability over 7 days (r=0.82).
02Reliability of the individual subscales was inadequate, with coefficients ranging from 0.50 to 0.72, meaning subscale scores should be interpreted with caution.
03Higher total kinesiophobia scores correlated with lower physical activity, lower quality of life, and higher anxiety and depression.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used a convenience sample of patients already referred to cardiac rehabilitation, which may exclude those with the highest fear who refused participation, potentially underestimating the scale's performance in highly fearful patients. The four-factor subscales had inadequate reliability, limiting their clinical utility for detailed profiling. The analysis excluded four items from the original scale to achieve a better model fit, which changes the instrument compared to the original 17-item version.
Declared interests
No financial conflicts of interest were declared. The study was supported by a grant from the Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use the individual subscale scores (Perceived threat, Fear of harm, etc.) to guide specific clinical decisions. The study found these subscales had inadequate reliability (0.50 to 0.72), so the total score is the only reliable metric from this version.