A Psychometric Analysis of the Adaptation Study of the "Insulin Delivery Method Satisfaction Survey" into Turkish

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1, 38 - 49, 22.04.2025

Tuğba Bilgehan , Şeyma Demir Erbaş

https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.1490607

Öz

Aim: This study aimed to adapt the "Insulin Delivery Method Satisfaction Survey" into Turkish and evaluate its psychometric properties.
Material and Methods: This methodological study was conducted with 214 adult individuals with type 1 diabetes who visited the Endocrinology Clinics. Data were collected using a "Demographic Information Form" and the "Insulin Delivery Method Satisfaction Survey." As part of the validity and reliability analyses of the scale, language, content, construct validity and reliability analyses were performed.
Results: The scale's language validity was ensured using the translation-back translation technique, and the content validity index was 1.0. The scale consists of 9 items and 3 sub-dimensions, explaining 75.712% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the scale has a good fit. Reliability analysis showed a Cronbach's alpha of 0.760 and McDonald's Omega of 0.873 for the entire scale. For the sub-dimensions, Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.797 to 0.929, and McDonald's Omega values ranged from 0.846 to 0.898.
Conclusion: The results indicate that the scale is a valid and reliable tool for assessing satisfaction with insulin delivery methods in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Diabetes Mellitus , insulin , reliability and validity , satisfaction , type 1 diabetes

İnsülin Uygulama Yöntemi Memnuniyet Anketi’nin Türkçe’ye Uyarlama Çalışmasına İlişkin Psikometrik Bir Analiz

Öz

Amaç: Bu araştırma, “İnsülin Uygulama Yöntemi Memnuniyet Anketi”nin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması ve psikometrik özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla yapıldı.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Metodolojik tasarıma sahip bu araştırma, Endokrinoloji Hastalıkları polikliniğine başvuran tip 1 diyabetli 214 yetişkin birey ile yürütüldü. Araştırma verileri “Tanıtıcı Bilgi Formu” ve “İnsülin Uygulama Yöntemi Memnuniyet Anketi” ile toplandı. Ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması kapsamında, dil, kapsam ve yapı geçerliği ile güvenirlik analizleri yapıldı.
Bulgular: Çeviri-geri çeviri tekniği ile dil geçerliği yapılan ölçeğin kapsam geçerlik indeksi 1.0’dır. Ölçek, 9 maddeden ve 3 alt boyuttan (toplam varyansın %75,712’sini açıklar) oluşmaktadır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinden elde edilen uyum indeksleri değerlerine göre ölçeğin iyi uyum düzeyine sahip olduğu belirlendi. Güvenirlik analizi sonuçlarına göre, ölçeğin tümüne yönelik Cronbach alfa değerinin 0,760, Mcdonald Omega=0.873; alt boyutlara yönelik Cronbach alfa değerlerinin 0,797 ile 0,929, Mcdonald Omega değerlerinin 0.846-0.898 arasında değiştiği belirlendi.
Sonuç: Araştırmadan elde edilen sonuçlar doğrultusunda ölçeğin tip 1 diyabeti olan bireylerde insülin uygulama yöntemi memnuniyetini değerlendirmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğu belirlendi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Diabetes mellitus , güvenirlik ve geçerlik , insülin , memnuniyet , tip 1 diyabet

Kaynakça

• Al Hayek, A. A., Robert, A. A., & Al Dawish, M. A. (2021). Efficacy of i-Port Advance system on patients satisfaction and glycemic control among patients with type 1 diabetes in Saudi Arabia. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome, 15(3), 747–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2021.03.028
• Barnard, K. D., Hood, K. K., Weissberg-Benchell, J., Aldred, C., Oliver, N., & Laffel, L. (2015). Psychosocial assessment of artificial pancreas (AP): Commentary and review of existing measures and their applicability in AP research. Diabetes Technol Ther, 17(4), 295-300.
• Beaton, D., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2007). Recommendations for the cross-cultural adaptation of the DASH & Quick DASH outcome measures. Institute for Work & Health. Retrieved from https://dash.iwh.on.ca/sites/dash/files/downloads/cross_cultural_adaptation_2007.pdf
• Beavers, A. S., Lounsbury, J. W., Richards, J. K., Huck, S. W., Skolits, G. J. & Esquivel, S. L. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 18(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.7275/qv2q-rk76
• Bisio, A., Gonder-Frederick, L., McFadden, R., Cherñavvsky, D., Voelmle, M., Pajewski, M., Yu, P., Bonner, H., & Brown, S. A. (2022). The Impact of a recently approved automated insulin delivery system on glycemic, sleep, and psychosocial outcomes in older adults with type 1 diabetes: A pilot study. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 16(3), 663–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296820986879
• Borsa, J. C., Damásio, B. F., & Bandeira, D. R. (2012). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of psychological instruments: Some considerations. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 22(53), 423–432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-43272253201314
• Bulantekin Düzalan, Ö., & İnkaya, B. (2022). Psychometric properties of Turkish version of insulin delivery device satisfaction (IDSS) scale in patients with type 2 diabetes. Primary Care Diabetes, 16(2), 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2022.01.001.
• Çokluk Bökeoğlu, Ö. & Koçak, D. (2016). Using Horn’s parallel analysis method in exploratory factor analysis for determining the number of factors. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(2), 537–551. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.2.0328
• Coster, W. J., & Mancini, M. C. (2015). Recommendations for translation and cross-cultural adaptation of instruments for occupational therapy research and practice. Revista de Terapia Ocupacional da Universidade de São Paulo, 26(1), 50. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2238-6149.v26i1p50-7
• Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
• Dimitrov, D. M. (2014). Statistical methods for validation of assessment scale data in counseling and related fields. John Wiley & Sons.
• Dorer, B. (2012). ESS round 6 translation guidelines (1st ed.). European Social Survey, GESIS.
• Esin, M. N. (2014). Veri toplama yöntem ve araçları & veri toplama araçlarının güvenirlik ve geçerliği. In S. Erdoğan, N. Nahcivan, & M. N. Esin (Eds.), Hemşirelikte Araştırma: Süreç, Uygulama ve Kritik (pp. 169–192). Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri.
• Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129.
• Hendrieckx, C., Husin, H. M., Russell-Green, S., Halliday, J. A., Lam, B., Trawley, S., McAuley, S. A., Bach, L. A., Burt, M. G., Cohen, N. D., Colman, P. G., Holmes-Walker, D. J., Jenkins, A. J., Lee, M. H., McCallum, R. W., Stranks, S. N., Sundararajan, V., Jones, T. W., O'Neal, D. N., Speight, J., … Australian JDRF Closed-Loop Research Group (2024). The diabetes management experiences questionnaire: Psychometric validation among adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine: a Journal of the British Diabetic Association, 41(3), e15195. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.15195.
• Howard, M. C. (2016). A review of exploratory factor analysis decisions and overview of current practices: What we are doing and how can we improve? International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
• Hsu, H. Y., Troncoso Skidmore, S., Li, Y., & Thompson, B. (2014). Forced zero cross-loading misspecifications in measurement component of structural equation models: Beware of even “small” misspecifications. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 10(4), 138-152. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000084
• International Test Commission. (2018). ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (Second Edition). International Journal of Testing, 18(2), 101–134.
• James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2013). An introduction to statistical learning. Springer. Jesus, L. M. T., & Valente, A. R. (2016). Cross-cultural adaptation of health assessment instruments. Retrieved from http://sweet.ua.pt/lmtj/lmtj/JesusValente2016.pdf
• Kılıç, A. F. & Doğan, N. (2021). Comparison of confirmatory factor analysis estimation methods on mixed-format data. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(1), 21-37. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.782351
• Kropff, J., & DeVries, J. H. (2016). Continuous glucose monitoring, future products, and update on worldwide artificial pancreas projects. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 18 Suppl 2(Suppl 2), S253–S263. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2015.0345
• Kubiak, T., Priesterroth, L., & Barnard-Kelly, K. D. (2020). Psychosocial aspects of diabetes technology. Diabetic Medicine: A Journal of the British Diabetic Association, 37(3), 448–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14234.
• LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2002). Nursing research: Methods, appraisal, and utilization. Mosby Elsevier.
• Manning, M. L., Singh, H., Stoner, K., & Habif, S. (2020). The development and psychometric validation of the diabetes impact and device satisfaction scale for individuals with type 1 diabetes. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 14(2), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296819897976.
• Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430
• Orcan, F. (2018). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: which one to use first? Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 9(4), 414-21. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.394323
• Paulsen, J., & BrckaLorenz, A. (2017). Internal consistency. FSSE Psychometric Portfolio. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/24503/FSSE17_Internal_Consistency_Reliability.pdf?sequence=1
• Peyrot, M., & Rubin, R. R. (2005). Validity and reliability of an instrument for assessing health-related quality of life and treatment preferences: the Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire. Diabetes Care, 28(1), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.1.53.
• Polit D. F. (2015). Assessing measurement in health: Beyond reliability and validity. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(11), 1746–1753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.07.002.
• Polonsky, W. H., Fisher, L., Hessler, D., & Edelman, S. V. (2015). Development of a new measure for assessing insulin delivery device satisfaction in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 17(11), 773–779. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2015.0140.
• R Core Team. (2024). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
• Ravinder, E. B. & Saraswathi, A. (2021). Literature review of Cronbach alpha coefficient (α) and Mcdonald’s omega coefficient (ω). European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 7(6), 2943-2949.
• Revelle, W. (2018). Psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research. Northwestern University. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
• Rosseel, Y. L. (2012). An R package for structural equation modeling and more (Version 0.5-12 BETA). Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
• Schmidt, A. M. (2018). Highlighting diabetes mellitus: The epidemic continues. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, 38(1), e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.310221
• Shah, R. B., Patel, M., Maahs, D. M., & Shah, V. N. (2016). Insulin delivery methods: Past, present and future. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation, 6(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/2230-973X.176456
• Sinan, A. T. & Demir, S. (2010). The man had linguistics liked: Prof. Dr. Doğan Aksan (1929-2010). Journal of Turkish Studies, 5(4), 639-662.
• Souza, A. C., Alexandre, N. M. C., & Guirardello, E. B. (2017). Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e da validade. Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude: revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil, 26(3), 649–659. https://doi.org/10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022.
• Soysal, S. (2023). Çok boyutlu test yapılarında alfa, tabakalı alfa ve omega güvenirlik katsayılarının karşılaştırılması. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 213-236. https://doi.org/10.38151/akef.2023.51
• Speight, J., Choudhary, P., Wilmot, E. G., Hendrieckx, C., Forde, H., Cheung, W. Y., Crabtree, T., Millar, B., Traviss-Turner, G., Hill, A., & Ajjan, R. A. (2023). Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review. Diabetic Medicine: A Journal of the British Diabetic Association, 40(1), e14944. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14944
• Streiner, D., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2016). Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use (5th edition). Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 40(3), 294–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12484.
• Surucu, L. & Maslakcı, A. (2020). Validity and reliability in quantitative research. Business and Management Studies: An International Journal, 8, 2694-2726. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i3.1540.
• Tanenbaum, M. L., Hanes, S. J., Miller, K. M., Naranjo, D., Bensen, R., & Hood, K. K. (2017). Diabetes device use in adults with type 1 diabetes: Barriers to uptake and potential intervention targets. Diabetes Care, 40(2), 181–187. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-1536
• Tauschmann, M., & Hovorka, R. (2018). Technology in the management of type 1 diabetes mellitus - current status and future prospects. Nature Reviews. Endocrinology, 14(8), 464–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41574-018-0044-y
• Watson, J. C. (2017). Establishing evidence for internal structure using exploratory factor analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 50(4), 232-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2017.1336931
• World Health Organization. (2017). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/
• Yasir, A. S. M. (2016). Cross cultural adaptation & psychometric validation of instruments: Step-wise description. International Journal of Psychiatry, 1(1), 1-4.
• Yaşlıoğlu, M. M. (2017). Factor analysis and validity in social sciences: Application of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business, 46(Special Issue), 74-85.
• Yavuz, G. & Doğan, N. (2015). Boyut sayısı belirlemede Velicer’in map testi ve Horn’un paralel analizinin kullanılması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 176-88.