Fizyoterapistlerde Klinik Muhakemeye Yönelik Öz Yeterlilik Skalasının Türkçe Formunun Psikometrik Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, ‘Klinik Akıl Yürütme İçin Fizyoterapist Öz-Yeterlilik Skalası”nı Türkçe’ye uyarlamak ve skalanın psikometrik özelliklerini incelemek, böylece Türk fizyoterapistlerde klinik muhakeme öz yeterliliğini değerlendirmek için geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç sağlamaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma iki aşamalı kesitsel bir tasarım izlemiştir. İlk aşamada, ölçek, dilsel ve kavramsal eşdeğerliği sağlamak için yerleşik kültürler arası uyarlama yönergeleri kullanılarak Türkçeye çevrilmiştir. İkinci aşamada, psikometrik özellikler kartopu örnekleme yoluyla 132 Türk fizyoterapist ile değerlendirilmiştir. Veriler çevrimiçi bir anket aracılığıyla toplanmış ve analizler faktör analizi, iç tutarlılık (Cronbach's alpha), test-tekrar test güvenilirliği (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, ICC) ve bilinen grup geçerliliğini içermiştir. Bulgular: Faktör analizi, mesleki öz yeterlilik ve genel öz yeterlilikle ilgili maddeleri birbirinden ayırarak orijinal ölçekle tutarlı iki faktörlü bir yapı ortaya koymuştur. İç tutarlılık 0,812 Cronbach alfa ile güçlü iken test-tekrar test güvenilirliği mükemmeldir (ICC = 0,841). Bilinen grup geçerliliği analizleri, mesleki deneyim yıllarına bağlı olarak öz yeterlilik puanlarında önemli farklılıklar olduğunu göstermiş, on yıldan fazla deneyime sahip fizyoterapistlerde daha yüksek puanlar gözlenmiştir (p = 0,015). Sonuç: Klinik Akıl Yürütme İçin Fizyoterapist Öz-Yeterlilik Skalası’nın Türkçe versiyonu geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik göstermiştir. Türk fizyoterapistler arasında klinik muhakeme öz yeterliliğini değerlendirmek için uygun bir araçtır. Bu beceriyi ölçmek ve potansiyel olarak geliştirmek için araştırma ve klinik eğitim bağlamlarında uygulanabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öz Yeterlilik
• Klinik Akıl Yürütme
• Psikometri
• Kültürlerarası Karşılaştırma
• Fizyoterapistler

Investigation of Psychometric Properties of Turkish Version of the Self-Efficacy Scale for Clinical Reasoning in Physiotherapists

Öz

Objective: This study aimed to adapt the 'Self-Efficacy Scale for Clinical Reasoning in Physiotherapists' into Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties, thereby providing a valid and reliable tool for assessing self-efficacy in clinical reasoning among Turkish physiotherapists. Materials and Methods: The study followed a two-phase cross-sectional design. In the first phase, the scale was translated into Turkish using established cross-cultural adaptation guidelines to ensure linguistic and conceptual equivalence. In the second phase, psychometric properties were evaluated with 132 Turkish physiotherapists, recruited through snowball sampling. Data were collected via an online survey, and analyses included factor analysis, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, ICC), and known group validity. Results: Factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure consistent with the original scale, distinguishing professional and general self-efficacy items. Internal consistency was strong, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.812, while test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.841). Known group validity analyses showed significant differences in self-efficacy scores based on years of professional experience, with higher scores observed in physiotherapists with over ten years of experience (p = 0.015). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the 'Self-Efficacy Scale for Clinical Reasoning in Physiotherapists' demonstrated robust validity and reliability. It is a suitable instrument for evaluating self-efficacy in clinical reasoning among Turkish physiotherapists. It can be applied in research and clinical education contexts to measure and potentially enhance this skill.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Self Efficacy
• Clinical Reasoning
• Psychometrics
• Cross-Cultural Comparison
• Physical Therapists

Kaynakça

1. Dernek Tüzüğü [Internet]. [cited 2022 Oct 10]. Available from: https://www.fizyoterapistler.org.tr/dernek-tuzugu
2. APTA [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2021 Nov 28]. APTA Report: Direct Access Widespread, But with Barriers. Available from: https://www.apta.org/article/2017/10/20/apta-report-use-of-direct-access-among-pts-is-widespread-but-barriers-need-to-be-addressed
3. Elvén M, Hochwälder J, Dean E, Söderlund A. Development and initial evaluation of an instrument to assess physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behavior change. Physiother Theory Pract. 2018 May;34(5):367–83. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2017.1419521.
4. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist. 1982; 37:122–47. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122.
5. Aper L, Reniers J, Koole S, Valcke M, Derese A. Impact of three alternative consultation training formats on self-efficacy and consultation skills of medical students. Med Teach. 2012;34(7):e500-507. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.668627.
6. Mavis B. Self-efficacy and OSCE performance among second year medical students. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2001;6(2):93–102. doi: 10.1023/a:1011404132508.
7. Saab MM, Hegarty J, Murphy D, Landers M. Incorporating virtual reality in nurse education: A qualitative study of nursing students’ perspectives. Nurse Educ Today. 2021 Oct;105:105045. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105045
8. Jo HH, Hwang WJ. Factors Influencing on Problem Solving Ability of Nursing Students Experiencing Simulation Practice. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 17;19(18):11744. doi:10.3390/ijerph191811744.

9. Shelton SH. Developing the Construct of General Self-Efficacy 1. Psychol Rep. 1990 Jun;66(3):987–94. doi:10.1177/1069072707305763
10. Chen G, Gully SM, Whiteman JA, Kilcullen RN. Examination of relationships among trait-like individual differences, state-like individual differences, and learning performance. J Appl Psychol. 2000 Dec;85(6):835–47. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.835.
11. Venskus DG, Craig JA. Development and Validation of a Self-Efficacy Scale for Clinical Reasoning in Physical Therapists. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2017;31(1):14–20. doi:10.1097/00001416-201731010-00005
12. Furze J, Kenyon LK, Jensen GM. Connecting Classroom, Clinic, and Context: Clinical Reasoning Strategies for Clinical Instructors and Academic Faculty. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2015;27(4):368–75. doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000185.
13. Ohtake PJ, Lazarus M, Schillo R, Rosen M. Simulation experience enhances physical therapist student confidence in managing a patient in the critical care environment. Phys Ther. 2013 Feb;93(2):216–28. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110463.
14. Mandrusiak AM, Isles R, Chang AT, Choy NLL, Toppenberg R, McCook D, et al. Senior physiotherapy students as standardised patients for junior students enhances self-efficacy and satisfaction in both junior and senior students. BMC Med Educ. 2014 May 23;14:105. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-105.
15. van Lankveld W, Jones A, Brunnekreef JJ, Seeger JPH, Bart Staal J. Assessing physical therapist students’ self-efficacy: measurement properties of the Physiotherapist Self-Efficacy (PSE) questionnaire. BMC Med Educ. 2017 Dec 12;17(1):250. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-1094-x.
16. Fayers PM, Machin D. Sample size: how many patients are necessary? Br J Cancer. 1995 Jul;72(1):1–9. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1995.268.
17. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. David L. Streiner, Geoffrey R. Norman, John Cairney. Oxford university press.
18. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Dec 15;25(24):3186–91. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
19. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2(14):i–iv, 1–74. doi:10.3310/hta2140
20. Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
21. Howard M. A Review of Exploratory Factor Analysis Decisions and Overview of Current Practices: What We Are Doing and How Can We Improve? 2016;(32):51–62. doi:10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
22. Shavit S, Kushnir T, Gottlieb U, Springer S. Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Reliability, and Validity of a Hebrew Version of the Physiotherapist Self-Efficacy Questionnaire Adjusted to Low Back Pain Treatment. Healthcare. 2023;1(11):85. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11010085.
23. Forbes R, Mandrusiak AM, Smith M, Russel T. New-graduate Physical Therapists’ Self-efficacy to Perform Patient Education Is Influenced by Entry-level Training Experiences. J Phys Ther Educ. 2018;1(31):46,54. doi:10.1097/JTE.0000000000000022.