Psychometric Properties of Turkish Version of Hypoglycemia Attitudes and Behavior Scale

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 247 - 254, 20.06.2022

Bahar İnkaya Özlem Bulantekin Düzalan

https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.992579

Öz

Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the reliability and validity of the Hypoglycemia Attitudes and Behavior Scale (HABS) for the Turkish population. Method: The study was conducted with 153 individuals with Type 2 diabetes mellitus who used insulin. In evaluating data, content validity index, Cronbach α, test-retest testing, item total score correlation, explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis and concordance statistics were used. Results: Cronbach alpha values for the subscales were determined as 0.71 for avoidance, 0.72 for confidence, and 0.85 for anxiety. The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the factor structure of the adapted scale was in accordance with the three-factor model of the original scale. It was found that the 11-item Hypoglycemia Attitudes and Behavior Scale consisted of three factors: avoidance of hypoglycemia, confidence in hypoglycemia, and anxiety concerning hypoglycemia. Three items in the original scale were removed because their error variances were negative and they did not have significant t values. Conclusion: The results showed that the HABS was a valid and reliable scale instrument for the Turkish population.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Attitude, Behaviour, Hypoglicemia, Nursing, Type 2 diabetes, Validity

HİPOGLİSEMİ TUTUM VE DAVRANIŞ ÖLÇEĞİNİN TÜRKÇE VERSİYONUNUN PSİKOMETRİK ÖZELLİKLERİ

Öz

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, Hipoglisemi Tutum ve Davranış Ölçeğinin (HTDÖ) Türk toplumunda geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini değerlendirmekti. Yöntem: Çalışmaya insülin kullanan Tip 2 diabetes mellitusu olan 153 birey katıldı. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde içerik geçerlilik indeksi, Cronbach α, test tekrar test, madde toplam puan korelasyonu, açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve uyum istatistikleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: Cronbach alfa değerleri kaçınma alt boyutu için 0.71, güven alt boyutu için 0.72 ve anksiyete alt boyutu için 0.85 olarak belirlendi. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları, uyarlanan ölçeğin faktör yapısının, özgün ölçekteki üç faktörlü model ile uyumlu olduğunu gösterdi. On bir maddeden oluşan Hipoglisemi Tutum ve Davranış Ölçeğinin 'hipoglisemiden kaçınma, hipoglisemik güven ve hipoglisemik endişe' olmak üzere üç faktörden meydana geldiği bulundu. Orijinal ölçekte olan 3 madde, hata varyansları negatif olduğu ve anlamlı t değerlerine sahip olmadığı için çıkarıldı. Sonuç: Sonuçlar, HTDÖ'nün Türk toplumu için geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğunu gösterdi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tutum, Davranış, hipoglisemi, hemşirelik, tip 2 diyabet, geçerlilik

Kaynakça

• 1. Guariguata L, Whiting D, Weil C, Unwin. The International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas methodology for estimating global and national prevalence of diabetes in adults. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 2011. 94: 322-332.
• 2. American Diabetes Association, Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes Care 2021. Jan; 44 (Supplement 1): S73-S84. https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/44/Supplement_1/S73.https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-S006 (Er. Tar. 10.08.2021)
• 3. Fidler C, Christensen TE, Gillard S. Hypoglycemia: An overview of fear of hypoglycemia, quality-of-life, andimpact on costs. Journal of Medical Economics 2011. 14, 646–655.
• 4. Wild D, Von Maltzahn R, Brohan E, Christensen T, Clauson P, Gonder L et al. Critical review of the literature on fear of hypoglycemia in diabetes: Implications for diabetes management and patient education. Patient Education and Counseling 2007. 68: 10–15.
• 5. Gilbert R, Fulcher G. Reduction in fear of hypoglycemia in subjectswithsub- optimallycontrolleddiabetesusing a glargine insulin-based treatment regimen. Canadian Journal of Diabetes 2008. 32: 101–106.
• 6. Hajos TR, Polonsky WH, Pouwer F, Snoek FJ. Towards defining a cut-off score for elevated fear of hypoglycemia on the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey Worry subscale in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014. 37:102–108.
• 7. Yun JS, Ko SH. Severe Hypoglycemia in Patients with Diabetes. Diabetes and Metabolısm Journal 2012. 36: 273-276.
• 8. Gjerlow E, Marit R, Bjorgaas MR, Elsen W, Sandra E, Olsen OB. Fear of Hypoglycemia in Women and Men With Type 1 Diabetes, Wolters Kluwer Health; 2014.143-149.
• 9. Leiter LA, Yale JF, Chiasson JL, Harris SB, Kleinstiver P, Sauriol L. Assessment of the impact of fear of hypoglycemic episodes on glycemic and hypoglycemia management. Can J Diabetes 2005. 29(3):186-92.
• 10. Hanna KM, Weaver MT, Stump TE, Fortenberry JD, DiMeglio LA. Therelationship of wory about hypoglicemia with diabetic spesific and typical you behaviour among emerging adult stype 1 diabetes. Diabetes Educator 2014. 40(4):533-542.
• 11. Cryer PE. Hypoglycemia: the limiting factor in the glycemic management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia f2002. 45(7):937-48.
• 12. Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Hesslerr D, Edelman SV. Identifying the worries and concerns about hypoglycemia in adults with type 2 diabetes. Journal of Diabetes and Its Complications 2015. 29:1171-1176.
• 13. Cantürk C, Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Intercultural Scale Adaptation Stages, Language and Culture Adaptation:Updated Guideline. FNJN Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing 2018. 26(3): 199-210. DOI: 10.26650/FNJN397481.
• 14. Polit D and Beck CT. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 8th ed. London (UK); Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
• 15. Tavsancil E. Attitudes measurement and data analysis with SPSS; Ankara (Turkey): Atlas Publication; 2002.19-66
• 16. Sencan H. Reliability and validity of the social and behavioral measurement. Ankara (Turkey); Seckin Publication; 2005. 742-788.
• 17. Cole DA. Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1987. 55:584-594.
• 18. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2nd Edition ed.). New York The Guilford Press; 2005.126-128.