Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of Psychiatric Nurse Self-Efficacy Scales: cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To develop the Psychiatric Nurse Self-Efficacy Scales, and to examine their reliability and validity.

Design

We developed the Improved Self-Efficacy Scale (ISES) and Decreased Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) using existing evidence. Statistical analysis was conducted on the data to test reliability and validity.

Setting

The study's setting was psychiatric facilities in three prefectures in Japan.

Participants

Data from 514 valid responses were extracted of the 786 responses by psychiatric nurses.

Outcome measures

The study measured the reliability and validity of the scales.

Results

The ISES has two factors ('Positive changes in the patient' and 'Prospect of continuing in psychiatric nursing') and the DSES has three ('Devaluation of own role as a psychiatric nurse', 'Decrease in nursing ability due to overload' and 'Difficulty in seeing any results in psychiatric nursing'). With regard to scale reliability, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.634-0.845. With regard to scale validity, as the factorial validity of the ISES and DSES, for the ISES, χ²/df (110.625/37) ratio=2.990 (p<0.001), goodness-of-fit index (GFI)=0.962, adjusted GFI (AGFI)=0.932, comparative fit index (CFI)=0.967 and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.062; for the DSES, χ²/df (101.982/37) ratio=2.756 (p<0.001), GFI=0.966, AGFI=0.940, CFI=0.943, RMSEA=0.059 and Akaike Information Criterion=159.982. The concurrent validity of the General Self-Efficacy Scale was r=0.149-0.446 (p<0.01) for ISES and r=-0.154 to -0.462 (p<0.01) for DSES, and the concurrent validity of the Stress Reaction Scale was r=-0.128 to 0.168 for ISES, r=0.214-0.398 for DSES (p<0.01).Statistical analyses showed the scales to be reliable and valid measures.

Conclusions

The ISES and DSES can accurately assess psychiatric nurses' self-efficacy. Using these scales, it is possible to formulate programmes for improving psychiatric nurses' feelings of self-efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Yada H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8744105 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Self-efficacy is the belief that one can perform a specific behavior or task in the future, and it has been associated with physical and psychological aspects in people with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. The self-efficacy of individuals with arthritis can be assessed using the Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale. The 8-item Short-Form ASES (ASES-8) has been employed in recent times. However, the reliability and validity of the Japanese ASES-8 (ASES-8J) have not been investigated. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the ASES-8J. Overall, 179 Japanese participants with knee osteoarthritis (OA) were enrolled. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to confirm internal validity. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to estimate test-retest reliability. Construct validity was analyzed using the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and the problem-solving and positive thinking subscales of Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (Brief COPE). Discriminant validity was analyzed by comparing "worse" and "better" groups based on pain severity; short-form version of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21); Brief Fear of Movement Scale for Osteoarthritis (BFOMSO); Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS); and physical function subscale of Western Ontario and McMaster Arthritis Index. Cronbach's alpha and ICC were 0.94 and 0.81, respectively. Correlation coefficients among ASES-8J, PSEQ, and Brief COPE problem-solving and positive thinking subscales were 0.42, 0.43, and 0.32, respectively. Regarding the depression and stress subscales of DASS-21, BFOMSO, and PCS, the worse group showed significantly lower ASES-8J scores than the better group. Coefficients of correlation among ASES-8J, PSEQ, and the problem-solving and positive thinking subscales of Brief COPE were low to moderate. These findings suggest that the ASES-8J is a valid and reliable tool for assessing self-efficacy in Japanese patients with knee OA and can facilitate comparisons of arthritis self-efficacy between Japanese patients and non-Japanese patients.

Project description:Background:With the rapid increase in ageing population, China is confronted with the daunting challenge of a growing number of patients with neurocognitive disorders (NCDs). This trend makes the maintenance of self-health and early intervention essential, highlighting the need for a tool that assesses self-efficacy of older adults in maintaining brain health or cognitive function. Aim:This study aimed to design the Brain Health Self-Efficacy Scale (BHSES) to measure elderly individuals' attitudes to NCDs, motivations and future plans for controlling risks. The psychometric properties of BHSES have been validated. Methods:Based on the current literature and relevant models, a 19-item scale was created during the first stage. A total of 660 older adults in the Yinhang community of Shanghai were included. The statistical approaches of item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), criterion-related validity and reliability test were used to evaluate the quality of BHSES. In addition, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) were used as criteria to test the criterion-related validity. Results:To test item differentiation, the study adopted item analysis and excluded item 8. Selecting a random half of the sample for EFA, the BHSES was refined to 16 items, which were categorised into the following three dimensions: 'memory belief efficacy', 'self-care efficacy' and 'future planning efficacy'. These were highly consistent with the hypothesis model. Its cumulative variance contribution rate reached 61.14%, with factor loads of all items above 0.5. The three-factor model was confirmed by the remaining data through CFA. All fit indices reached the acceptable level (?2=3.045, Goodness of Fit Index=0.898, adjusted Goodness of Fit Index=0.863, Comparative Fit Index=0.916, Incremental Fit Index=0.917, Tucker-Lewis Index=0.900, root mean square error of approximation=0.079 and root mean residual=0.068). The GDS and SAS scores revealed significant correlations with the BHSES score, indicating a high criterion-related validity. The overall Cronbach's ? coefficient was 0.793, with the ? coefficients' distribution of subdimensions ranging from 0.748 to 0.883. Conclusions:The 16-item, self-compiled BHSES is a reliable and valid measurement. It could help identify older adults with potential risks for developing NCDs or with high suspicion of cognitive impairment onset in recent periods and also offer insight into tracking brain health self-efficacy in association with cognition status.