Pediatri Hemşirelerinde Dikkat Dağıtma Becerisi Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirliği

Yıl 2023, , 230 - 236, 28.12.2023

Serap Özdemir , Erhan Elmaoğlu

https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.1240768

Öz

Amaç: Bu araştırmada pediatri hemşirelerinin dikkat dağıtma becerisini ölçmek amacıyla geliştirilen, Pediatri Hemşirelerinde Dikkat Dağıtma Becerisi Ölçeği’nin (PHDDBÖ) Türk toplumuna uyarlanması amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Araştırma metodolojik tiptedir. Çalışma, Güneydoğu Anadolu bölgesindeki bir kadın doğum ve çocuk hastalıkları hastanesinde görev yapan 232 pediatri hemşiresinin katılımı ile gerçekleştirildi. PHDDBÖ, Ogihara tarafından 2022 yılında geliştirilen, 4’lü likert tipte, 21 madde ve 5 alt boyuttan oluşan bir ölçektir. Ölçeğin geçerliği; Açıklayıcı ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) öncesinde örneklem sayısının yeterliği için Kaiser Meier Olkin (KMO), verilerin normal dağılımı ise Barlett testi ile yapıldı. Güvenirliği; test tekrar test yöntemi, Cronbach alfa katsayısı testi ile yapıldı.
Bulgular: Araştırmada, ölçeğin Kapsam Geçerliği İndeksi 0.9 ile 1 arasında bulundu. Kendalls W test değeri, 0.285 olarak bulunmuştur. (X2= 56.989, p=0.001) Açıklayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) sonucunda; KMO=.894, Ki-kare=1779.551, p=0.000 olarak bulundu. Barlett testi sonucuna göre verilerin normal dağılım gösterdiği görüldü (X2=1779.551, p=0.001). Çalışmada ölçeğin maddelerinin faktör yüklerinin 0.39 ile 0.74 arasında olduğu bulundu. Araştırmada DFA; X2 =370.45; p=0.001 ve RMSEA=0.071 olarak saptandı. Araştırmada Inter Class Correlation (ICC)=0.995, p=0.001 olarak belirlendi.
Sonuç: Pediatri Hemşirelerinde Dikkat Dağıtma Becerisi Ölçeği’nin Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu bulundu.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dikkat dağıtma, geçerlik ve güvenirlik, ölçek, pediatri hemşireleri

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

yok

Validity and Reliability of the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale in Pediatric Nurses

Öz

Aim: It was aimed to adapt the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale (DIPS), developed to measure the distraction skills of pediatric nurses, to Turkish society.
Materials and Methods: This methodological study was conducted with 232 pediatric nurses in a gynecology and pediatrics hospital in the Southeastern Anatolia region. DIPS is a 4-point Likert-type scale developed by Ogihara in 2022, consisting of 21 items and five sub-dimensions. Validity of the scale; Before Explanatory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the Kaiser Meier Olkin (KMO) test was used to ensure the adequacy of the sample number, and the normal distribution of the data was performed using the Bartlett test. Reliability; The test-retest method was performed using the Cronbach alpha coefficient test.
Results: In the study, the Content Validity Index of the scale was found to be between 0.9 and 1. Kendalls W test value was found to be 0.285. (X2= 56.989, p=0.001) As a result of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA); KMO=.894, Chi-square=1779.551, p=0.000. According to the Bartlett test results, it was seen that the data showed normal distribution (X2 = 1779.551, p = 0.001). In the study, it was found that the factor loadings of the items of the scale were between 0.39 and 0.74. CFA in the research; X2 =370.45; It was determined as p=0.001 and RMSEA=0.071. In the study, Inter Class Correlation (ICC) = 0.995, p = 0.001.
Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale for Pediatric Nurses was found to be a valid and reliable measurement tool.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Distraction, pediatric nurses, scale, validity and reliability

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• 1. De Mula-Fuentes B, Quintana M, Rimbau J, Martínez-Mejías A, Úriz MS, Rivera-Pérez C, vd. Anxiety, hospital fears and conduct and behavioral alterations during pediatric hospitalization. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2018;46(2):42-50.
• 2. Jurko A, Minarik M, Jurko T, Tonhajzerova I. White coat hypertension in pediatrics. Ital J Pediatr. 2016;42:4.
• 3. Triantafyllou C, Matziou V. Aggravating factors and assessment tools for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in children after hospitalization. Psychiatriki. 2019;30(3):264-70.
• 4. Lerwick JL. Minimizing pediatric healthcare-induced anxiety and trauma. World J Clin Pediatr. 2016;5(2):143-50.
• 5. Oommen S, Shetty A. Does parental anxiety affect children’s perception of pain during intravenous cannulation?. Nurs Child Young People. 2020;32(3):21-4.
• 6. Pavlova M, Orr SL, Noel M. Parent-Child Reminiscing about Past Pain as a Preparatory Technique in the Context of Children’s Pain: A Narrative Review and Call for Future Research. Children (Basel). 2020;7(9):130.
• 7. Bulut M, Alemdar DK, Bulut A, Şalcı G. The Effect of Music Therapy, Hand Massage, and Kaleidoscope Usage on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Fear, and Stress in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Peri Anesthesia Nursing. 2020;35(6):649-57.
• 8. Gates M, Hartling L, Shulhan-Kilroy J, MacGregor T, Guitard S, Wingert A, vd. Digital Technology Distraction for Acute Pain in Children: A Meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2020;145(2):e20191139.
• 9. Getahun AB, Endalew NS, Mersha AT, Admass BA. Magnitude and Factors Associated with Preoperative Anxiety Among Pediatric Patients: Cross-Sectional Study. Pediatric Health Med Ther. 2020;11:485-94.
• 10. Yoo SY, Cho H. Exploring the Influences of Nurses’ Partnership with Parents, Attitude to Families’ Importance in Nursing Care, and Professional Self-Efficacy on Quality of Pediatric Nursing Care: A Path Model. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(15):5452.
• 11. Maslak K, Favara-Scacco C, Barchitta M, Agodi A, Astuto M, Scalisi R, vd. General anesthesia, conscious sedation, or nothing: Decision-making by children during painful procedures. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2019;66(5):e27600.
• 12. Care Quality Comission 2018 Adult Inpatient Survey: Quality and Methodology Report [Internet] .2018 [Erişim Tarihi 01 Ocak 2023] Erişim adresi: https://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/20151125_nhspatientsurveys_scoring_methodology.pdf
• 13. Eklund R, Kreicbergs U, Alvariza A, Lövgren M. Children’s Views Are Not Taken Into Account in Accordance With Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the Family Talk Intervention When a Parent Is Cared for in Palliative Care. Omega (Westport). 2022;85(1):126-54.
• 14. Przybylska MA, Burke N, Harris C, Kazmierczyk M, Kenton E, Yu O, vd. Delivery of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in an acute paediatric setting: An audit of information available and service gap analysis. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2019;3(1):e000445.
• 15. Lewis: Report of the Children and Young People’s... - Google Scholar [İnternet]. [Erişim Tarihi 19 Ocak 2023]. Erişim adresi: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?hl=en&publication_year=2014&pages=%00empty%00&author=I.+Lewis&author=C.+Lenehan&author=S.+Shribman&isbn=%00null%00&title=Report+of+the+Children+and+Young+People%27s+Health+Outcomes+Forum+2014%2F15
• 16. Nicholl A, Evelegh K, Deering KE, Russell K, Lawrence D, Lyons-Wall P, vd. Using a Respectful Approach to Child-centred Healthcare (ReACH) in a paediatric clinical trial: A feasibility study. PLoS One. 2020;15(11):e0241764.
• 17. Bartholdson C, Sandeberg M af, Molewijk B, Pergert P. Does participation in ethics discussions have an impact on ethics decision-making? A cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals in paediatric oncology. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2021;2:101950.
• 18. Şan EG, Naime A. Psychosocial status assessment scale for children aged 3-6 years – parent-form development: Validity and reliability study. Psi Hem Derg. 2021; 12(2):132-9.
• 19. Ogihara H. Development and validation of the Distracting Ingenuity Promotion Scale for paediatric nurses to support the psychological outcomes of paediatric patients and their families: A survey-based cross-sectional cohort study. Nursing Open. 2022;9:1653–66.
• 20. Hayran PDO. Sağlık Bilimlerinde Araştırma ve İstatistik Yöntemler. Nobel Tıp Kitabevi; 2012. s. 168.
• 21. Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res. 1992;5(4):194-7.
• 22. Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2004;30(3):211-6.
• 23. Uludağ E, Mumcu B. The effects of cultural and emotional intelligence on care in nursing. HSQ. 2023;3(1):1-11. . 24. Türe E, Yazar A, Akin F, Aydin A. Kronik Hasta Çocuklara Bakım Verenlerin Bakım Verme Yükünün Değerlendirilmesi Evaluation of Caregiving Burden in Caregivers of Children with Chronic Illness. Bozok Tıp Dergisi. 2018;8(3):46-53.
• 25. Çapık C, Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Intercultural Scale Adaptation Stages, Language and Culture Adaptation: Updated Guideline. FNJN. 2018;199-210.
• 26. Ayhan Y, Kocaman G, Bektaş M. “Kanıta Dayalı Hemşireliğe Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği”nin Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. JAREN. 2015;17(2-3):21-35.
• 27. Orak NŞ, Alpar ŞE. Hemşirelerin Profesyonel Değerleri Ölçeği’nin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. MÜSBED. 2012;2(1):22-31.
• 28. Huriye K, Kelleci M. Development, valıdıty and relıabılıty of Psychosocıal Care Profıcıency Self-Assessment Scale. Psi Hem Derg. 2021;12(3):263-71.
• 29. Çetinkaya A, Özmen D, Temel AB. Hemşirelikte Mesleğe Bağlılık Ölçeği’nin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. DEUHEFED. 2015;8(2):54-60.