Sağlık Çalışanlarında COVID-19 Anksiyete Sendromu Ölçeği’nin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı kaygı, anksiyete, algılanan tehdit ve stresörlere karşı önlemler almak için kullanılan COVID-19 Anksiyete Sendromu Ölçeği (C-19ASS)”ni Türkçeye uyarlamak ve geçerlilik güvenilirliğini sağlık çalışanlarında test etmektir. Materyal ve Metot: Metodolojik-tanımlayıcı-kesitsel tipteki çalışmanın örneklemini 18 yaş üstü 223 sağlık çalışanı oluşturdu. Verilerin elde edilmesinde “Sosyodemografik Veri Toplama Formu” ve “C-19ASS kullanıldı. Farklı şehirlerde ve hastanelerde görev yapan sağlık çalışanları anketleri bağlantı linki ile web tabanlı olarak yanıtladı. Bulgular: Ölçek toplam varyansın %55,013 açıklamıştır. Faktör yükleri iki alt boyut için sırasıyla 0,487-0,909 ve 0,580-0,806 arasında dağılmıştır. CFA'da uyum indeksleri RMSEA 0,063, GFI 0,956, CFI 0,977, IFI 0,977, TLI 0,968 ve NFI 0,952 olarak saptanmıştır. Ölçek toplam ve iki alt boyut için cronbach alfa değerleri sırasıyla 0,891, 0,851 ve 0,776'dır. Sonuç: Anksiyete Sendromu Ölçeği’nin ruhsal durum değerlendirmesi ve ruh sağlığı hizmetleri planlamalarında yararlı olacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anksiyete
• COVID-19
• geçerlilik
• güvenilirlik
• sağlık profesyoneli

Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of the COVID-19 Anxiety Syndrome Scale among Health Professionals

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to adapt the COVID-19 Anxiety Syndrome Scale (C-19ASS), used as a reference to take measures against anxiety, worry, perceived threats and stressors, into Turkish and to test its reliability and validity on healthcare workers. Materials and Methods: The sample of the methodological-descriptive-cross-sectional study consisted of 223 healthcare workers aged 18 years and above. "Sociodemographic Data Collection Form" and "C-19ASS were used to obtain the data. Healthcare workers working in different cities and hospitals answered the questionnaires online using a link. Results: The scale explained 55.013% of the total variance. In EFA, the factor loadings for the two sub-dimensions were distributed between 0.487-0.909 and 0.580-0.806, respectively. The fit indices in CFA were determined as RMSEA 0.063, GFI 0.956, CFI 0.977, IFI 0.977, TLI 0.968 and NFI 0.952. Cronbach alpha values for the total scale and the two sub-dimensions were 0.891, 0.851 and 0.776, respectively. Conclusions: These findings support by showing that the Anxiety Syndrome Scale will be useful with mental status assessment and mental health services planning.

Keywords

• COVID-19
• anxiety
• validity
• reliability
• health professional

References

1. 1. Lorettu L, Piu D, Bellizzi S. Uncertainty in pandemic times. In: Anxiety, uncertainty, and resilience during the pandemic period-anthropological and psychological perspectives. IntechOpen; 2021. doi:10.5772/intechopen.99454
2. 2. Jayaram S, Krishnamurthy PT, Selvaraj D, Nemani SV, Rymbai E, Sugumar D, et al. Temporal unpredictability and probabilistic uncertainty induced anxiety in the times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Indian J Pharm Educ Res. 2022;56:321-328.
3. 3. Li L, Taeihagh A, Tan SY. A scoping review of the impacts of COVID-19 physical distancing measures on vulnerable population groups. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):599.
4. 4. Limcaoco R, Mateos E, Fernandez J, Roncero C. Anxiety, worry and perceived stress in the world due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Preliminary results. medRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.04.03.20043992
5. 5. Yin X, Wang J, Feng J, et al. The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak on Chinese residents’ mental health. SSRN Electron J. 2020. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3556680
6. 6. Odriozola-González P, Planchuelo-Gómez Á, Irurtia MJ, Luis-García R. Psychological symptoms of the outbreak of the COVID-19 confinement in Spain. J Health Psychol. 2022;27(4):825-835. doi:10.1177/1359105320967086
7. 7. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand SL, et al. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med. 2020;32(6):959-976. doi:10.1017/s0033291702006074
8. 8. Taylor S, Landry CA, Paluszek MM, Fergus TA, McKay D, Asmundson GJG. Development and initial validation of the COVID stress scales. J Anxiety Disord. 2020;72:102232. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102232

9. 9. Nikčević AV, Spada MM. The COVID-19 anxiety syndrome scale: Development and psychometric properties. Psychiatry Res. 2020; 292: 113322. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113322
10. 10. Fernandez R, Sikhosana N, Green H, et al. Anxiety and depression among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic umbrella review of the global evidence. BMJ Open. 2021;11(9):e054528. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054528
11. 11. Al Maqbali M, Alsayed A, Hughes C, Hacker E, Dickens GL. Stress, anxiety, depression and sleep disturbance among healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: An umbrella review of 72 meta-analyses. PLoS One. 2024;19(5):e0302597. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0302597
12. 12. Kanbay Y, Yalap O. SPSS ile temel veri analizleri. Ankara: Akademisyen Kitabevi AŞ; 2022.
13. 13. Johnson RB, Christensen LB. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage Publications; 2024.
14. 14. Koyuncu İ, Kılıç A. The use of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: A document review. Educ Sci. 2019;44(198):361-388. doi:10.15390/EB.2019.7665
15. 15. Kartal M, Bardakçı S. Reliability and validity analysis with SPSS and AMOS applied examples. Turkey: Akademisyen Publishing; 2018.
16. 16. Seçer İ. Psychological test development and adaptation process; SPSS and Lisrel applications. 2nd ed. Ankara: Anı Publishing; 2018.
17. 17. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications; 2023.
18. 18. DeVellis RF. Scale development, theory and applications. 4th ed. India: SAGE Publication; 2016