Skip to main content

Table 1 Features of hypertension self-management tools

From: The development of a self-management evaluation scale for elderly adults with hypertension based on the capability, opportunity, and motivation-behaviour (COM-B) model

Scale

Reliability and validity

Advantages

Disadvantages

Chronic Disease Self-Management Study Measures

Cronbach’s α of each dimension: 0.72–0.91, test–retest reliability: 0.65–0.80

Recognized, with good reliability and validity, applicable to all patients with chronic diseases

Not specific. The self-management assessment only involves exercise, cognitive symptom management, and communication with doctors; and the content of the assessment is not comprehensive

Hypertension Patients of Self-Management Behavior Rating Scale

Cronbach’s α of each dimension: 0.757–0.911, Cronbach’s α of total scale: 0.914, Content Validity Index (CVI): 0.82–0.94, Overall scale CVI: 0.91

Currently widely used in hypertension self-management

Assessment content is not comprehensive and the test–retest reliability of the scale has not been examined

Hypertension Self-Management Scale

Cronbach’s alpha for total scale: 0.854, total halving: 0.856, Overall scale CVI: 0.976

It involves the content of the risk factor dimension, management dimension is low

There is no theoretical basis for the development of the scale, and the reliability of the risk factor

Hypertension Self-Profile

Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale: 0.950, test–retest reliability: 0.918, scale CVI: 0.83–1.00

The scale has a clear theoretical. framework, and its content addresses motivational factors

The expression of items in the scale is too specialized, the evaluation of a total of 60 items is time-consuming, and it is mainly used to evaluate the self-care aspects of hypertensive patients