Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS): Results from the First Austrian-German PEGS Version Exploring Meaningful Activities for Children
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2014
Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS): Results from the First Austrian-German PEGS Version Exploring Meaningful Activities for Children
Occupation-based participatory assessment and treatment planning requires appropriate tools to explore clients' perceptions and priorities for their day-to-day lives. Currently, no such instrument is available in German for use with children and their proxies. This study aimed to translate and adapt the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS) for use in German-speaking regions. Translation, adaptation, and field testing of the Austrian-German PEGS version followed guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report assessments. Forty-two children, ages 5 to 10, with various health conditions, their parents, and teachers participated in this study. The Austrian-German PEGS was successfully translated and culturally adapted. Children, their parents, and teachers reported the child's competences related to the addressed items and identified goals for intervention. Participants added specific culturally relevant activities. Data can now be used to further develop the PEGS for German-speaking regions and to continue research on culturally meaningful activities for children and families. [OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health. 2014; 34(3):119–130.
BeatonD.E.BombardierC.GuilleminF.FerrazM.B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25, 3186–3191.
2.
CostaU. (2011). KRAH®—Klientenzentrierung, ressourcenorientierung, alltagsrelevanz und handlungsorientierung als basis und ausrichtung im ergotherapeutischen prozess [KRAH®—Client-centeredness, resource-orientation, day-to-day-life-relevance, and occupation-orientation as foundation and direction in the occupational therapy process]. Ergotherapie, 4, 13–15.
3.
CostaU. (2014). Meaningful activity as health promoting factor. Outcomes of KRAH®-based intervention for children with difficulties in their occupational performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Applied Sciences Tyrol & Private University of Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Tyrol, Austria
4.
CostaU.BrauchleG. (2013). Collaborative goal setting with and for children as part of therapeutic intervention. Manuscript submitted for publication.
5.
CostaU.SchönthalerE. (2011). Pediatric occupational therapy in Austria. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, & Early Intervention, 4, 176–185. doi:10.1080/19411243.2011.629547
6.
DunfordC.MissiunaC.StreetE.SibertJ. (2005). Children's perceptions of the impact of developmental coordination disorder on activities of daily living. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 207–214.
7.
Engel-YegerB.Hanna KasisA. (2010). The relationship between developmental co-ordination disorders, child's perceived self-efficacy and preference to participate in daily activities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 36, 670–677. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2214.2010.01073.x
8.
FlickU. (2012). Qualitative sozialforschung. Eine einführung [Qualitative social research. An introduction]. Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag.
9.
GrahamF.RodgerS.ZivianiJ. (2009). Coaching parents to enable children's participation: An approach for working with parents and their children. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 56, 16–23. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2008.00736.x
10.
KleinS.Magill-EvansJ. (1998). Reliability of perceived competence measures for young school-aged children. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 293–298. doi:10.1177/000841749806500507
11.
LawM. (2002). Participation in the occupations of everyday life. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56, 640–649. doi:10.5014/ajot.56.6.640
12.
LawM.SteinwenderS.LeclairS. (1998). Occupation, health and well-being. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 81–91. doi:10.1177/000841749806500204
13.
MissiunaC.PollockN. (2000). Perceived efficacy and goal setting in young children. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 101–109. doi:10.1177/000841740006700303
14.
MissiunaC.PollockN.CostaU.JosmanN.LangelandI.MagalhãesL.C.SundholmL.K. (2010, May). Giving children a voice: Cross-cultural validation of the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS) in eight countries. Poster presented at the 15th World Federation of Occupational Therapists meeting, Santiago, Chile.
15.
MissiunaC.PollockN.LawM. (2014). Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
16.
MissiunaC.PollockN.LawM.WalterS.CaveyN. (2006). Examination of the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS) with children with disabilities, their parents, and teachers. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 204–214. doi:10.5014/ajot.60.2.204
17.
PalisanoR.ChiarelloL.KingG.A.NovakI.StonerT.FissA. (2012). Participation-based therapy for children with physical disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34, 1041–1052. doi:10.3109/09638288.2011.628740
18.
PerssonD.ErlandssonL.-K.EklundM.IwarssonS. (2001). Value dimensions, meaning, and complexity in human occupation—A tentative structure for analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 8, 7–18.
19.
RosenbaumP.KingS.LawM.KingG.EvansJ. (1998). Family-centred service: A conceptual framework and research review. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 18(1), 1–20. doi:10.1080/J006v18n01_01
20.
RosenbergL.BartO.RatzonN.Z.JarusT. (2013). Complementary contribution of parents and therapists in the assessment process of children. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 60, 410–415. doi:10.1111/1440-1630.12041
21.
SognnaesM.LangelandI. (2006). Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS)—Brukermedvirkning for Norske barn?St. Olavs Hospital, Klinikk for Klinsike Servicefunksjoner avd Ergotherapi, Norway.
22.
TamC.TeachmanG.WrightV. (2008). Paediatric application of individualised client-centred outcome measures: A literature review. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71, 286–296.
23.
ten VeldenM.CouldrickL.KinébanianA.SadloG. (2013). Dutch children's perspectives on the constructs of the Child Occupational Self-Assessment (COSA). OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 33, 50–58. doi:10.3928/15394492-20120817-01
24.
Vroland-NordstrandK.Krumlinde-SundholmL. (2012a). The Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS), part I: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation to a Swedish context. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 19, 497–505. doi:10.3109/11038128.2012.684221
25.
Vroland-NordstrandK.Krumlinde-SundholmL. (2012b). The Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS), part II: Evaluation of test-retest reliability and differences between child and parental reports in the Swedish version. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 19, 506–514. doi:10.3109/11038128.2012.685759
26.
WallenM.ZivianiJ. (2005). PEGS. The perceived efficacy and goal setting system. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 52, 266–267. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2005.00499.x
World Health Organization. (2007). International classification of functioning, disability and health—Children and youth version (ICF-CY). Geneva: Author.
WressleE.Eeg-OlofssonA.-M.MarcussonJ.HenrikssonC. (2002). Improved client participation in the rehabilitation process using a client-centred goal formulated structure. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 34, 5–11.
