Subjective Response Measurement to Prosthesis or Device Use: Validation of the Prosthetic–Bionic Paradigm Questionnaire (PBP-Q)

Augusto Iossa Fasano, Paolo Mandolillo, Yura Loscalzo, Marco Giannini, Gabriele Grippo, Isabella Imbimbo and Rosapia Lauro Grotto
Additional contact information
Augusto Iossa Fasano: Cultural Scientific Association “Metandro”, 51100 Pistoia, Italy
Paolo Mandolillo: Cultural Scientific Association “Metandro”, 51100 Pistoia, Italy
Yura Loscalzo: Department of Health Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Florence, 50135 Florence, Italy
Marco Giannini: Department of Health Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Florence, 50135 Florence, Italy
Gabriele Grippo: Cardiology Department, Ospedale di Prato, 59100 Prato, Italy
Isabella Imbimbo: Clinical Psychology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00100 Rome, Italy
Rosapia Lauro Grotto: Department of Health Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Florence, 50135 Florence, Italy

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 8, 1-14

Abstract: Many subjects with somatic pathologies or traumas in their recent anamnesis tend to experience symptoms and changes to their daily life parameters after technically successful treatment. Hence, this study aims to validate an investigation tool inspired by the prosthetic–bionic paradigm—namely, the PBP-Q—which allows for the evaluation of variation in questions relating to identity, psychosociality, and psychopathology in relation to the use of a prosthesis or device. We gathered 118 participants (68 females and 50 males) aged between 27 and 94 years (Mean = 58.42 ± 15.17). We performed both exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analyses on this sample. Moreover, we calculated the internal consistency for the PBP-Q scales and the total score for the questionnaire’s final 26-item and 5-factor versions. The five scales are psychological well-being; interpersonal relationships; professional relationships; autonomy and safety; addictions, compulsions, and obsessions. The internal consistency is good for both the total score and the subscales. In conclusion, overall, the PBP-Q has satisfactory psychometric properties, especially considering the measure’s complexity. It provides a quick and effective way to evaluate the changes that might arise after the use of a prosthesis or device and, subsequently, has implications for clinical practice.

Keywords: prosthesis; device; prosthetic–bionic paradigm; identity; technological medicine (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4656/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4656/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4656-:d:792336

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().