Dataset Information

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services.

ABSTRACT: An adequate work climate fosters productivity in organizations and increases employee satisfaction. Workers in emergency health services (EHS) have an extremely high degree of responsibility and consequent stress. Therefore, it is essential to foster a good work climate in this context. Despite this, scales with a full study of their psychometric properties (i.e., validity evidence based on test content, internal structure and relations to other variables, and reliability) are not available to measure work climate in EHS specifically. For this reason, our objective was to develop a scale to measure the quality of work climates in EHS. We carried out three studies. In Study 1, we used a mixed-method approach to identify the latent conceptual structure of the construct work climate. Thus, we integrated the results found in (a) a previous study, where a content analysis of seven in-depth interviews obtained from EHS professionals in two hospitals in Gibraltar Countryside County was carried out; and (b) the factor analysis of the responses given by 113 EHS professionals from these same centers to 18 items that measured the work climate in health organizations. As a result, we obtained 56 items grouped into four factors (work satisfaction, productivity/achievement of aims, interpersonal relationships, and performance at work). In Study 2, we presented validity evidence based on test content through experts' judgment. Fourteen experts from the methodology and health fields evaluated the representativeness, utility, and feasibility of each of the 56 items with respect to their factor (theoretical dimension). Forty items met the inclusion criterion, which was to obtain an Osterlind index value greater than or equal to 0.5 in the three aspects assessed. In Study 3, 201 EHS professionals from the same centers completed the resulting 40-item scale. This new instrument produced validity evidence based on the internal structure in a second-order factor model with four components (RMSEA = 0.079, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.97; NFI = 0.95, and NNFI = 0.97); absence of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in 80% of the items; reliability (? = 0.96); and validity evidence based on relations to other variables, specifically the test-criterion relationship (? = 0.680). Finally, we discuss further developments of the instrument and its possible implications for EHS workers.

SUBMITTER: Sanduvete-Chaves S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5786539 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services.

Sanduvete-Chaves Susana S Lozano-Lozano José A JA Chacón-Moscoso Salvador S Holgado-Tello Francisco P FP

Frontiers in psychology 20180122

An adequate work climate fosters productivity in organizations and increases employee satisfaction. Workers in emergency health services (EHS) have an extremely high degree of responsibility and consequent stress. Therefore, it is essential to foster a good work climate in this context. Despite this, scales with a full study of their psychometric properties (i.e., validity evidence based on test content, internal structure and relations to other variables, and reliability) are not available to m ...[more]

PMID: 29403417

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe family environment is important for explaining individual health behaviour. While previous research mostly focused on influences among family members and dyadic interactions (parent-child), the purpose of this study was to develop a new measure, the Family Health Climate Scale (FHC-Scale), using a family-based approach. The FHC is an attribute of the whole family and describes an aspect of the family environment that is related to health and health behaviour. Specifically, a questionnaire measuring the FHC (a) for nutrition (FHC-NU) and (b) for activity behaviour (FHC-PA) was developed and validated.MethodsIn Study 1 (N=787) the FHC scales were refined and validated. The sample was randomly divided into two subsamples. With random sample I exploratory factor analyses were conducted and items were selected according to their psychometric quality. In a second step, confirmatory factor analyses were conducted using the random sample II. In Study 2 (N=210 parental couples) the construct validity was tested by correlating the FHC to self-determined motivation of healthy eating and physical activity as well as the families' food environment and joint physical activities.ResultsExploratory factor analyses with random sample I (Study 1) revealed a four (FHC-NU) and a three (FHC-PA) factor model. These models were cross-validated with random sample II and demonstrated an acceptable fit [FHC-PA: χ(2)=222.69, df=74, p<.01; χ(2)/df=3.01; CFI=.96; SRMR=.04; RMSEA=.07, CI .06/.08; FHC-NU: χ(2)=278.30, df=113, p<.01, χ(2)/df=2.46, CFI=.96; SRMR=.04; RMSEA=.06, CI .05/.07]. The perception of FHC correlated (p<.01) with the intrinsic motivation of healthy eating (r=.42) and physical activity (r=.56). Moreover, parental perceptions of FHC-NU correlated with household soft drink availability (r=-.31) and perceptions of FHC-PA with the frequency of joint physical activities with the child (r=.51). These patterns were found on the intraindividual and interindividual level.ConclusionsTwo valid instruments measuring the FHC within families were developed. The use of different informants' ratings demonstrated that the FHC is a family level variable. The results confirm the high relevance of the FHC for individuals' health behaviour. The FHC and the measurement instruments are useful for examining health-related aspects of the family environment.

Project description:BackgroundNational Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is the most validated clinical scale for stroke recognition, severity grading, and symptom monitoring in acute care and hospital settings. Numerous modified prehospital stroke scales exist, but these scales contain less clinical information and lack compatibility with in-hospital stroke scales. In this real-life study, we aimed to investigate if NIHSS conducted by paramedics in the field is a feasible and accurate prehospital diagnostic tool.MethodsThis prospective cohort study is part of Treat-NASPP (Treat-Norwegian Acute Stroke Prehospital Project) conducted at a single medical center in Østfold, Norway. Sixty-three paramedics were trained and certified in NIHSS, and the prehospital NIHSS scores were compared with the scores obtained by in-hospital stroke physicians. Interrater agreement was assessed using a Bland-Altman plot with 95% limits of agreement. In secondary analysis, Cohen κ was used for the clinical categories NIHSS score of 0 to 5 and ≥6. As a safety measure, prehospital time was compared between paramedics conducting NIHSS and conventional paramedics.ResultsWe included 274 patients. The mean difference in NIHSS scores between the paramedics and the stroke physicians was 0.92 with limits of agreement from -5.74 to 7.59. Interrater agreement for the 2 clinical categories was moderate with a κ of 0.58. The prehospital NIHSS scoring was performed mean (SD) 42 (14) minutes earlier than the in-hospital scoring. Prehospital time was not significantly increased in the NIHSS-trained paramedic group compared with conventional paramedics (median [interquartile range] on-scene-time 18 [13-25] minutes versus 16 [11-23] minutes, P=0.064 and onset-to-hospital time 86 [65-128] minutes versus 84 [56-140] minutes, P=0.535).ConclusionsParamedics can use NIHSS as an accurate and time efficient prehospital stroke severity quantification tool. Introducing NIHSS in the emergency medical services will enable prehospital evaluation of stroke progression and provide a common language for stroke assessment between paramedics and stroke physicians.RegistrationURL: https://www.Clinicaltrialsgov; Unique identifier: NCT03158259.

Project description:Background:Professional nursing environments determine the quality of care and patient outcomes. Assessing the quality of environments is essential to improve and obtain better health outcomes. Simplifying and shortening the way to evaluate environments reliably is also important to help nurses better understand the strengths and weaknesses of their environments. In that sense, identifying essential elements of nursing environments would allow the construction of short assessment tools to improve such environments. Objective:To construct a short tool to assess primary health care (PHC) nursing environments based on the Practice Environment Scale-Nursing Work Index (PES-NWI) questionnaire. Methods:Observational, cross-sectional, analytical study (data collection February-April 2015). Tool: PES-NWI (31 items). Population: PHC nurses (three health districts in Valencia, Spain) with more than 3 months in the organization. The nurses were asked to select the 10 elements of the questionnaire (items) that they considered key to facilitate and improve professional care, establishing as a final selection criterion that they obtain a global election >40%. Variables: sociodemographic and 31 questionnaire items. Analysis: descriptive statistics, reliability, multidimensional scaling (ALSCAL), factor analysis, multiple linear regression. Finally, we have analyzed the concordance between both measurements (TOP10 score on the full scale score) using the Bland-Altman method. Results:Study sample = 269 (Response rate = 80.29%). A total of 10 elements were identified based on selection frequency of the questionnaire PES-NWI. A factorial analysis explained 62.1% of variance, internal structure of three dimensions: (1) Participation in leadership and management, (2) Nursing foundations for quality of care, (3) Adequacy of resources, with Accumulate Variance explained: Component (1): 24%; Component (2): 43.1%; Component (3): 62.1%. Reliability (Cronbach's Alpha) was 0.816 for short questionnaire, and >0.8 for all measurements. Stress = 0.184 and RSQ = 0.793. Bland-Altman method: the scaling tends to be 1.92 points higher (equivalent to a maximum deviation of 1.54%) than the full-scale PES-NWI score (max score on PES-NWI = 124 points). Conclusions:It is possible to identify essential elements of environments to construct a short tool that simplifies the study of PHC environments. Conducting rapid studies of environments will provide managers with information about specific elements that require prioritization to enhance quality of care and safety.

Dataset Information

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services.

Publications

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets