Dataset Information

Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Research shows that the professional healthcare working environment influences the quality of care, safety climate, productivity, and motivation, happiness, and health of staff. The purpose of this systematic literature review was to assess instruments that provide valid, reliable and succinct measures of health care professionals' work environment (WE) in hospitals.

Data sources

Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL EBSCOhost and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception through December 2018.

Study selection

Pre-defined eligibility criteria (written in English, original work-environment instrument for healthcare professionals and not a translation, describing psychometric properties as construct validity and reliability) were used to detect studies describing instruments developed to measure the working environment.

Data extraction

After screening 6397 titles and abstracts, we included 37 papers. Two reviewers independently assessed the 37 instruments on content and psychometric quality following the COSMIN guideline.

Results of data synthesis

Our paper analysis revealed a diversity of items measured. The items were mapped into 48 elements on aspects of the healthcare professional's WE. Quality assessment also revealed a wide range of methodological flaws in all studies.

Conclusions

We found a large variety of instruments that measure the professional healthcare environment. Analysis uncovered content diversity and diverse methodological flaws in available instruments. Two succinct, interprofessional instruments scored best on psychometrical quality and are promising for the measurement of the working environment in hospitals. However, further psychometric validation and an evaluation of their content is recommended.

SUBMITTER: Maassen SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7654380 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review.

Maassen Susanne M SM Weggelaar Jansen Anne Marie J W AMJW Brekelmans Gerard G Vermeulen Hester H van Oostveen Catharina J CJ

International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care 20201101 8

<h4>Purpose</h4>Research shows that the professional healthcare working environment influences the quality of care, safety climate, productivity, and motivation, happiness, and health of staff. The purpose of this systematic literature review was to assess instruments that provide valid, reliable and succinct measures of health care professionals' work environment (WE) in hospitals.<h4>Data sources</h4>Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL EBSCOhost and Google Scholar we ...[more]

PMID: 32648902

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based practice (EBP) is well known to most healthcare professionals. Implementing EBP in clinical practice is a complex process that can be challenging and slow. Lack of EBP knowledge, skills, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior can be essential barriers that should be measured using valid and reliable instruments for the population in question. Results from previous systematic reviews show that information regarding high-quality instruments that measure EBP attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy in various healthcare disciplines need to be improved. This systematic review aimed to summarize the measurement properties of existing instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors, and self-efficacy.MethodsWe included studies that reported measurement properties of instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors, and self-efficacy. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HaPI, AMED via Ovid, and Cinahl via Ebscohost were searched in October 2020. The search was updated in December 2022. The measurement properties extracted included data on the item development process, content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, and measurement error. The quality assessment, rating of measurement properties, synthesis, and modified grading of the evidence were conducted in accordance with the COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews.ResultsThirty-four instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors or self-efficacy were identified. Seventeen of the 34 were validated in two or more healthcare disciplines. Nurses were most frequently represented (n = 53). Despite the varying quality of instrument development and content validity studies, most instruments received sufficient ( +) ratings on content validity, with the quality of evidence graded as "very low" in most cases. Structural validity and internal consistency were the measurement properties most often assessed, and reliability and measurement error were most rarely assessed. The quality assessment results and overall rating of these measurement properties varied, but the quality of evidence was generally graded higher for these properties than for content validity.ConclusionsBased on the summarized results, the constructs, and the population of interest, several instruments can be recommended for use in various healthcare disciplines. However, future studies should strive to use qualitative methods to further develop existing EBP instruments and involve the target population.Trial registrationThis review is registered in PROSPERO. CRD42020196009. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020196009.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision making in healthcare is a fundamental right for patients. Healthcare professionals' perception of their own abilities to enable shared decision making is crucial for implementing shared decision making within service. IcanSDM (I can shared decision making) is a brief measure to investigate healthcare professionals' perception of shared decision making approaches to their practices. It was developed in Canada with French and English versions, and recently translated into German. This study aims to adapt the IcanSDM measure for Danish-speaking healthcare professionals, and evaluate its psychometric properties.MethodsCultural adaptation and translation based on Beaton et al.'s approach was applied. A forward translation by ten people and a backward translation by two people were performed. To assess comprehensibility, cognitive interviews were conducted with 24 healthcare professionals. Eighty healthcare professionals who were trained in shared decision making for either one hour (n = 65) or one day (n = 15) participated in the psychometric evaluation. The evaluation concerned acceptance, item characteristics, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations, factorial structure, internal consistency, and responsiveness.ResultsThe forward and backward translation revealed few discrepancies, and participants understood the items well. The psychometric evaluation showed a high completion rate and acceptable item difficulties and discrimination values. Both the factor analysis and the internal consistency showed a 2-factor structure: 1) healthcare professionals' capacity to implement shared decision making; and 2) healthcare professionals' capacity to practise shared decision making. The IcanSDM_Danish obtained a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.74. The evaluation of responsiveness showed improvement, but was not statistically significant.ConclusionThe IcanSDM_Danish has good cross-cultural validity and internal consistency, and a 2-factor structure. The IcanSDM_Danish is capable of providing reliable and valid measurement when evaluating constructed knowledge about shared decision making, and may be able to support the implementation of shared decision making training and evaluation of its impact.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify instruments or components of instruments that aim to measure aspects of a caring culture-shared beliefs, norms and values that direct professionals and managers to act caring in hospitals, and to evaluate their psychometric properties.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science and the International bibliography of the Social Sciences.Study selectionPeer-reviewed articles describing (components of) instruments measuring aspects of a caring culture in a hospital setting. Studies had to report psychometric data regarding the reliability or validity of the instrument. Potentially useful instruments that were identified after the title and abstract scan were assessed on relevance by an expert panel (n=12) using the RAND-modified Delphi procedure.ResultsOf the 6399 references identified, 75 were examined in detail. 7 studies each covering a unique instrument met our inclusion criteria. On average, 24% of the instrument's items were considered relevant for measuring aspects of the hospital's caring culture. Studies showed moderate-to-high validity and reliability scores. Validity was addressed for 6 of the 7 instruments. Face, content (90%) and construct (60%) validity were the most frequently reported psychometric properties described. One study (14%) reported discriminant validity of the instrument. Reliability data were available for all of the instruments. Internal consistency was the most frequently reported psychometric property for the instruments and demonstrated by: a Cronbach's α coefficient (80%), subscale intercorrelations (60%), and item-total correlations (40%).ConclusionsThe ultimate standard for measuring a caring culture in hospitals does not exist. Existing instruments provide partial coverage and lack information on discriminant validity, responsiveness and feasibility. Characteristics of the instruments included in this review could provide useful input for the design of a reliable and valid instrument for measuring a caring culture in hospitals.

Project description:BackgroundRecognizing and appropriately responding to ethical considerations is a crucial element of ethical nursing practice. To mitigate instances of ethical incongruity in healthcare and to promote nurses' comprehension of their professional ethical responsibilities, it is imperative for researchers to accurately evaluate ethical sensitivity. Conducting a systematic review of the available instruments would enable practitioners to determine the most suitable instrument for implementation in the field of nursing.AimThis review aims to systematically assess the measurement properties of instruments used to measure ethical sensitivity in nursing.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in July 2022 in the following electronic databases: Scopus, CINAHL, APAPsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed the studies in accordance with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. The updated criteria for good measurement properties are used to rate the result of measurement properties, and the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to grade the quality of the summarized evidence.ResultsThis review encompasses a total of 29 studies that describe 11 different instruments. Neither cross-cultural validity nor responsiveness was examined in any of the included studies. Whereas the majority of the instruments were conducted with at least some type of validity assessment, nearly all of the reliability results rated were indeterminate. Two instruments were recommended, the Ethical Sensitivity Questionnaire for Nursing Students (ESQ-NS) and the Ethical Awareness Scale for nurses in intensive care units. It is recommended that new self-administration instruments for special nursing settings be developed in accordance with the item response theory (IRT)/Rasch model.ConclusionThe selection of ethical sensitivity measurement instruments in nursing, and further research on the development, psychometric, and cross-cultural adaptation of these instruments, could be conducted in accordance with the findings and suggestions of this systematic review.Strengths and limitations• This review was conducted to assess 11 instruments that were used to measure ethical sensitivity in nursing in 29 studies. • The Ethical Sensitivity Questionnaire for Nursing Students (ESQ-NS) and the Ethical Awareness Scale for nurses in intensive care units can be recommended, but further reliability and cross-cultural validity testing are needed. • The IRT/Rasch model is also recommended to measure ethical sensitivity in nursing. • The potential limitation of utilizing the COSMIN checklist for assessing methodological quality is worth considering. • Test-retest was considered inappropriate; thus, the reliability testing of ethical sensitivity measurement instruments still needs to be explored.

Project description:Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare genetic disease associated with significant disease burden and considerable impact on health-related quality of life (HRQL). Currently no disease-specific clinical outcome assessments evaluate HRQL in individuals with TSC. A multi-center phase III study EXIST-3 (NCT01713946) assessed the efficacy and safety of two trough exposure ranges (Low exposure, LE: 3-7 ng/mL and high exposure, HE: 9-15 ng/mL) of adjunctive everolimus in patients aged 2-65 years with TSC and refractory partial-onset seizures (N = 366). Three age-specific HRQL measures were included as secondary endpoints including: quality of life in childhood epilepsy (QOLCE; caregiver-report for aged 2- < 11), the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory for Adolescents-48 (QOLIE-AD-48; self-report, aged ≥ 11- < 18), and the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-31-Problems (QOLIE-31-P; self-report, aged ≥ 18). Intellectual ability was evaluated using the Wechsler Non-Verbal (WNV) Scale of Ability. Post hoc analyses were performed on the core phase primary data from EXIST-3 to evaluate the psychometric properties of the HRQL measures and calculate meaningful change estimates. Results showed that a significant subset of the trial sample (4-21 year olds) scored in the intellectual disability range, as assessed by the WNV. Psychometric analyses of the three epilepsy measures (including reliability, validity, and ability to detect change) supported the appropriateness for use in TSC. Distribution-based meaningful change estimates were generated for each HRQL measure, with estimates for the QOLIE-31-P total score largely consistent with the published literature. To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation using clinical trial data to establish the psychometric properties of the QOLCE, QOLIE-AD-48, and QOLIE-31-P for use in individuals with TSC. These findings increase confidence in the measures as valid and reliable for use in clinical trials and future research in patients with TSC.

Project description:BackgroundCultural competence of healthcare professionals (HCPs) is recognized as a strategy to reduce cultural disparities in healthcare. However, standardised, valid and reliable instruments to assess HCPs' cultural competence are notably lacking. The present study aims to 1) identify the core components of cultural competence from a healthcare perspective, 2) to develop a self-report instrument to assess cultural competence of HCPs and 3) to evaluate the psychometric properties of the new instrument.MethodsThe conceptual model and initial item pool, which were applied to the cross-cultural competence instrument for the healthcare profession (CCCHP), were derived from an expert survey (n = 23), interviews with HCPs (n = 12), and a broad narrative review on assessment instruments and conceptual models of cultural competence. The item pool was reduced systematically, which resulted in a 59-item instrument. A sample of 336 psychologists, in advanced psychotherapeutic training, and 409 medical students participated, in order to evaluate the construct validity and reliability of the CCCHP.ResultsConstruct validity was supported by principal component analysis, which led to a 32-item six-component solution with 50% of the total variance explained. The different dimensions of HCPs' cultural competence are: Cross-Cultural Motivation/Curiosity, Cross-Cultural Attitudes, Cross-Cultural Skills, Cross-Cultural Knowledge/Awareness and Cross-Cultural Emotions/Empathy. For the total instrument, the internal consistency reliability was .87 and the dimension's Cronbach's α ranged from .54 to .84. The discriminating power of the CCCHP was indicated by statistically significant mean differences in CCCHP subscale scores between predefined groups.ConclusionsThe 32-item CCCHP exhibits acceptable psychometric properties, particularly content and construct validity to examine HCPs' cultural competence. The CCCHP with its five dimensions offers a comprehensive assessment of HCPs' cultural competence, and has the ability to distinguish between groups that are expected to differ in cultural competence. This instrument can foster professional development through systematic self-assessment and thus contributes to improve the quality of patient care.

Dataset Information

Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review.

Purpose

Data sources

Study selection

Data extraction

Results of data synthesis

Conclusions

Publications

Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets