Journal of Health And Care
Volume 21, Issue 3 (Autumn 2019)
JHC 2019, 21(3): 252-262 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Esmalizadeh A, Heidarzadeh M, Karimollahi M. Translation and Psychometric Properties of Good Nursing Care Scale from Nurses' Perspective in Ardabil Educational Centers, 2018. JHC 2019; 21 (3) :252-262
URL: http://hcjournal.arums.ac.ir/article-1-1054-en.html
URL: http://hcjournal.arums.ac.ir/article-1-1054-en.html
Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran
Abstract: (2815 Views)
Background & Aim: Identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and strengths of provided nursing care is emphasized to improve the quality of nursing care and access to it requires the use of valid tools in this field. This study aimed to translate and determine the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Nursing Care Scale.
Methods: This study was a methodological study in which the psychometric properties of the "Good Nursing Care Scale" were evaluated in 200 nurses working at hospitals of Ardabil University of Medical Sciences. After translating the original version of the questionnaire, the validity and the reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated. SPSS version 16 and AMOS version 24 were used for data analysis.
Results: The effect score of items in the face validity study for each item was higher than 2.4. The content validity ratio for whole scale was 0.88 and for each item was more than 0.63. The content validity index for total scale was 0.91 and for each item was more than 0.82. The correlation of total instrument scores with criterion tool was 0.754. According to the results of factor analysis, factor load were between 0.62 and 0.91, which all were significant. Therefore, the seven dimensions that were introduced in the main scale were confirmed with acceptable values. Cronbach's alpha was 0.907 and the correlation coefficient of 0.886 at test-retest showed that the scale has an internal consistency and acceptable reliability.
Conclusion: The Persian version of Good Nursing care scale had acceptable psychometric characteristics in the Iranian nursing population and can be used as a valid tool in nursing care studies.
Methods: This study was a methodological study in which the psychometric properties of the "Good Nursing Care Scale" were evaluated in 200 nurses working at hospitals of Ardabil University of Medical Sciences. After translating the original version of the questionnaire, the validity and the reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated. SPSS version 16 and AMOS version 24 were used for data analysis.
Results: The effect score of items in the face validity study for each item was higher than 2.4. The content validity ratio for whole scale was 0.88 and for each item was more than 0.63. The content validity index for total scale was 0.91 and for each item was more than 0.82. The correlation of total instrument scores with criterion tool was 0.754. According to the results of factor analysis, factor load were between 0.62 and 0.91, which all were significant. Therefore, the seven dimensions that were introduced in the main scale were confirmed with acceptable values. Cronbach's alpha was 0.907 and the correlation coefficient of 0.886 at test-retest showed that the scale has an internal consistency and acceptable reliability.
Conclusion: The Persian version of Good Nursing care scale had acceptable psychometric characteristics in the Iranian nursing population and can be used as a valid tool in nursing care studies.
Type of Study: article |
Subject:
Nursing care
Received: 2019/02/18 | Accepted: 2019/06/18 | Published: 2020/06/28
Received: 2019/02/18 | Accepted: 2019/06/18 | Published: 2020/06/28
References
1. Watson J. The philosophy and science of caring. University of Colorado, 2008.
2. Ghamari Zareh Z, Anoosheh M, Vanaki Z. Quality of nurse's performance and patients' satisfaction in cardiac care units. Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. 2008;10(1):15-19 [Persian].
3. Patel GN. Total quality management in healthcare. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2009;9(3):48-61.
4. Neishabory M, Raeisdana N, Ghorbani R, Sadeghi T. Nurses and patients viewpoints regarding quality of nursing care in the teaching hospitals of Semnan University of Medical Sciences. Koomesh Journal. 2009;12(2):134-43 [Persian].
5. Mousavi A, Mousavi F, Foroughi S, Zakavati R. Fundamental of management in nursing. Journal of Islamic Azad University Masjed Soleyman. 2007;42(1):18-22 [Persian].
6. Florin J, Ehrenberg A, Ehnfors M. Patients and nurses perceptions of nursing problems in an acute care setting. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2005;51(2):140-49. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03477.x] [PMID]
7. Merkouris A, Lemonidou C. Evaluation of patient satisfaction with nursing care: quantitative or qualitative approach?. Journal of Nursing Care Quality. 2004;41(4): 355-67. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2003.10.006] [PMID]
8. Grondahl VA, Kirchhoff J, Lauvli Andersen K, Aagaard Sorby L. Health care quality from the patients' perspective: a comparative study between an old and a new, high-tech hospital. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare. 2018;11(2):591-600. [DOI:10.2147/JMDH.S176630] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Wensing M, Elwyn G. Research on patients views in the evaluation and improvement of quality of care. Quality & Safety in Health Care. 2002;1(2):153-57. [DOI:10.1136/qhc.11.2.153] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Cleary PD. A hospitalization from hell: a patients perspective on quality. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2003;138(1):33-39. [DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-138-1-200301070-00009] [PMID]
11. Leino-Kilpi H, Vuorenheimo J. The patient's perspective on nursing quality: developing a framework for evaluation.Quality & Safety in Health Care. 1994;6(1):85-95. [DOI:10.1093/intqhc/6.1.85] [PMID]
12. Wilde B, Larsson G, Larsson M, Starrin B. Quality of care development of a patient-centred questionnaire based on a grounded theory model. Journal of Caring Sciences. 1994;8(1):39-48. [DOI:10.1111/j.1471-6712.1994.tb00223.x] [PMID]
13. Leino-kilpi H. good nursing care scale. Quality & Safety in Health Care. 2013;13(1):14-28.
14. Rehnström L, Christensson L, Leino‐Kilpi H, Unosson M. Adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the swedish version of the good nursing care scale for patients. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences. 2003;17(3):308-14. [DOI:10.1046/j.1471-6712.2003.00232.x] [PMID]
15. Zhao SH, Akkadechanunt T, Xue XL. Quality nursing care as perceived by nurses and patients in a chinese hospital. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2009;18(12):1722-28. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02315.x] [PMID]
16. Donmez YC, Ozbayır T. Validity and reliability of the good perioperative nursing care scale for turkish patients and nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2011;20(2):166-17. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03314.x] [PMID]
17. Istomina N, Suominen T, Razbadauskas, Martinkėnas A, Meretoja, Leino-Kilpi H. Competence of nurses and factors associated with it. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences. 2011;47(8):230-37. [DOI:10.3390/medicina47040033]
18. Revicki DA, Cook KF, Amtmann D, Harnam N, Chen WH, Keefe FJ. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the PROMIS pain quality item bank. Quality of Life Research. 2014;23(1):245-55. [DOI:10.1007/s11136-013-0467-9] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Mosadeghrad AM. Factors influencing healthcare service quality. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2014;3(2):77-89. [DOI:10.15171/ijhpm.2014.65] [PMID] [PMCID]
20. Pazargadi M, Zagheri Tafreshi M, Abed Saeedi Z. Nurses' perspectives on quality of nursing care: a qualitative study. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2007;31(2):155-58 [Persian].
21. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2011;17(2):135-37. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x] [PMID]
22. Broder HL, McGrath C, Cisneros GJ. Questionnaire development: face validity and item impact testing of the child oral health impact profile. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology. 2007;35(1):8-19. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00401.x] [PMID]
23. Vakili MM, Jahangiri N. Content validity and reliability of the measurement tools in educational, behavioral, and health sciences research. Journal of Medical Education Development. 2018;28(10):106-19. [DOI:10.29252/edcj.10.28.106]
24. Ayre C, John A. Critical values for lawshe's content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 2014;47(1):79-86 [DOI:10.1177/0748175613513808]
25. Lin Ch, Pakpour H, Brostrom A, Fridlund B. Psychometric properties of the 9-item European Heart Failure Self-Care Behavior Scale using confirmatory factor analysis and rasch analysis among Iranian patients. Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2017;42(8):52-68.
26. Terwee CB. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2007;60(1):34-42. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012] [PMID]
27. Leinonen T, Leino-Kilpi H, Stahlberg MR, Lertola K. The quality of perioperative care: development of a tool for the perceptions of patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2001;35(2):294-306. [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01846.x] [PMID]
28. Glarcher M, Schumacher P, Fritz E. Care quality instruments. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance. 2015;28(5):532-59. [DOI:10.1108/IJHCQA-01-2015-0010] [PMID]
29. Trizano-Hermosilla I, Alvarado J. Best alternatives to cronbach's alpha reliability in realistic conditions: congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016;24(7):769-77. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769] [PMID] [PMCID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |