Turkish validity and reliability study of the falsified hand sanitizer identification scale
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the validity and reliability of the Fake Hand Sanitizer Identification Scale, which was developed to help consumers determine safe and effective hand disinfectants, in Turkish culture and language.
Methods: This methodological and cross-sectional study was conducted between February and April 2021 by applying an online questionnaire to a state university staff. 355 people were reached. The Turkish validity of the scale was tested with language (translation-back translation), structure (Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)) and known group validity. Reliability was evaluated with Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient, item analysis based on item-total correlation, and test-retest method (Spearman correlation analysis).
Results: Majority of the participants (62.18%, n=217) were male, and the mean age of all participants was 41.14 ± 9.80 years. In DFA, x2/sd = 3.67, CFI = 0.98, GFI = 0.92, NFI = 0.97, and RMSEA = 0.08. As the frequency of daily use of sanitizer increased, the score obtained from the scale increased (p < 0.001). When all items were removed from the scale, the Cronbach's alpha value of the scale decreased. The Cronbach's alpha value of the scale was 0.934, 0.892 for factor 1, 0.891 for factor 2 and 0.818 for factor 3. The corrected item-total correlation values of all items ranged from 0.584 to 0.758. The test-retest correlation coefficient was 0.859 (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: The Turkish Falsified Hand Sanitizer Identification Scale is a valid and reliable 5-point Likert scale consisting of 12 items and 3 sub-dimensions.
Keywords
Disinfectant, COVID-19, validity, reliability
Ethical Statement
Ethical approval of the research was obtained from Fırat University Non-Interventional Research Ethics Committee with the letter dated 07.01.2021 and numbered 1899.
References
- Güner R, Hasanoğlu İ, Aktaş F. COVID-19: Prevention and control measures in community. Turk J Med Sci. 2020;50:571-7.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Hand sanitizer use out and about. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/handsanitizer- use.html. Accessed January 4, 2024
- Hoffmann T, Bakhit M, Krzyzaniak N, Del Mar C, Scott AM, Glasziou P. Soap versus sanitiser for preventing the transmission of acute respiratory infections in the community: a systematic review with metaanalysis and dose-response analysis. BMJ Open. 2021;11(8):e046175.
- Pittet D. Improving adherence to hand hygiene practice: a multidisciplinary approach. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7:234-40.
- Pradhan D, Biswasroy P, Kumar Naik P, Ghosh G, Rath G. A review of current interventions for COVID-19 prevention. Arch Med Sci. 2020;51(5):363-74.
- Ng JK, Tay FH, Wray PS, Saberi SSM, Ting KKK, Khor SM, et al. Inexpensive portable infrared device to detect and quantify alcohols in hand sanitizers for public health and safety. Anal Chem. 2021;93(45):15015-23.
- Abuga K, Nyamweya N, King’ondu O. Quality of alcohol based hand sanitizers marketed in the Nairobi Metropolitan Area. East Cent Afr J Pharm Sci. 2021;24:29-37.
- Shokoohi M, Nasiri N, Sharifi H, Baral S, Stranges S. A syndemic of COVID-19 and methanol poisoning in Iran: time for Iran to consider alcohol use as a public health challenge? Alcohol. 2020;87:25-7.
- Jairoun AA, Al-Hemyari SS, Shahwan M. The pandemic of COVID-19 and its implications for the purity and authenticity of alcohol-based hand sanitizers: the health risks associated with falsified sanitizers and recommendations for regulatory and public health bodies. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2021;17(1):2050-1.
- Moon CS. Estimations of the lethal and exposure doses for representative methanol symptoms in humans. Occup Environ Med. 2017;29:44.