[Internal validity and reliability of an instrument for evaluating quality of nursing care services for patients, nurses, and family members].

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
A Renghea, S Hernandez-Iglesias, M A Cuevas-Budhart, M T Iglesias López, J A Sarrion-Bravo, A Crespo Cañizares, M Gómez Del Pulgar García-Madrid
{"title":"[Internal validity and reliability of an instrument for evaluating quality of nursing care services for patients, nurses, and family members].","authors":"A Renghea, S Hernandez-Iglesias, M A Cuevas-Budhart, M T Iglesias López, J A Sarrion-Bravo, A Crespo Cañizares, M Gómez Del Pulgar García-Madrid","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2024.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To analyze the internal validity and reliability of the instrument for evaluating the quality of services adapted to three interest groups: patients, nurses, family members, and primary caregivers.</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>Our research was conducted meticulously, employing a mixed methodology with two phases: qualitative, using the focus group for internal validation of the instrument, and quantitative. Subsequently, the survey was passed to the interest group of 430 patients, 525 relatives, and 298 nurses. Chronbac's alpha reliability analysis, the multiple linear regression model as a point estimator of the parameters, and exploratory factor analysis with a maximum likelihood factor using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin to analyze the constructor and its indicators were performed to validate the adaptation. Finally, confirmatory factor analysis determines their respective measurement models' unidimensionality, validity, and reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The result shows that the factor loading of each subconstruct is more significant than 0.5 in the three models, which indicates that the aptitude indices of the model were met. In addition, the model meets the discriminant validity criteria. The behavior of the SERVPERF questionnaire was analyzed in terms of consistency, Cronbach's alpha=0.94.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The scale items' discrimination concerning the questions on global satisfaction is confirmed. This shows that the instrument is valid, reliable, and useful.</p>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhqr.2024.07.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To analyze the internal validity and reliability of the instrument for evaluating the quality of services adapted to three interest groups: patients, nurses, family members, and primary caregivers.

Material and method: Our research was conducted meticulously, employing a mixed methodology with two phases: qualitative, using the focus group for internal validation of the instrument, and quantitative. Subsequently, the survey was passed to the interest group of 430 patients, 525 relatives, and 298 nurses. Chronbac's alpha reliability analysis, the multiple linear regression model as a point estimator of the parameters, and exploratory factor analysis with a maximum likelihood factor using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin to analyze the constructor and its indicators were performed to validate the adaptation. Finally, confirmatory factor analysis determines their respective measurement models' unidimensionality, validity, and reliability.

Results: The result shows that the factor loading of each subconstruct is more significant than 0.5 in the three models, which indicates that the aptitude indices of the model were met. In addition, the model meets the discriminant validity criteria. The behavior of the SERVPERF questionnaire was analyzed in terms of consistency, Cronbach's alpha=0.94.

Conclusion: The scale items' discrimination concerning the questions on global satisfaction is confirmed. This shows that the instrument is valid, reliable, and useful.

[病人、护士和家属护理服务质量评估工具的内部有效性和可靠性]。
目的:分析服务质量评估工具的内部有效性和可靠性,该工具适用于三个利益群体:患者、护士、家庭成员和主要护理人员:我们的研究采用了一种混合方法,分为两个阶段:定性阶段(利用焦点小组对工具进行内部验证)和定量阶段。随后,我们向由 430 名患者、525 名亲属和 298 名护士组成的兴趣小组发放了调查问卷。为验证适应性,进行了Chronbac's alpha信度分析、作为参数点估计的多元线性回归模型,以及使用Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin最大似然因子的探索性因子分析,以分析构造函数及其指标。最后,确认性因子分析确定了各自测量模型的单维性、有效性和可靠性:结果表明,在三个模型中,各子结构的因子载荷均大于 0.5,这表明模型的能力指标得到了满足。此外,模型还符合判别效度标准。对 SERVPERF 问卷的行为进行了一致性分析,Cronbach's alpha=0.94.结论:结论:量表项目对总体满意度问题的判别得到了证实。这表明该工具是有效、可靠和有用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信