Enhancing job satisfaction measurement tool in healthcare settings: Insights from a University Hospital in Vietnam.

IF 2.3 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
SAGE Open Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-31 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20503121241292676
Nguyen Duc Thanh, Pham Quynh Anh, Pham Thi Huyen Chang, Ha Thi Minh Nguyet, Chu Huyen Xiem, Pham Van Hung, Le Bao Chau
{"title":"Enhancing job satisfaction measurement tool in healthcare settings: Insights from a University Hospital in Vietnam.","authors":"Nguyen Duc Thanh, Pham Quynh Anh, Pham Thi Huyen Chang, Ha Thi Minh Nguyet, Chu Huyen Xiem, Pham Van Hung, Le Bao Chau","doi":"10.1177/20503121241292676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Extensive scrutiny within organizational research has positioned job satisfaction as a pivotal factor contingent upon organizational contexts. Our study aimed to refine job satisfaction measurement tools for diverse healthcare settings using insights from a university hospital in Vietnam, enhancing the validity and applicability of these instruments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The procedure for the contextualization of a job satisfaction measurement tool was established encompassing six key steps: (1) Developing, selecting, or modifying the questionnaire; (2) Assessing face validity; (3) Ensuring content validity; (4) Designing the research for field testing; (5) Assessing the tool reliability and validity; and (6) Assessing discriminant validity between two tools. This procedure served as the foundation for a cross-sectional study involving 216 healthcare staff at a university hospital in Vietnam.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The modified tool, comprising 35 items (6 fewer than the original 41-item reference tool), was derived through evaluations of face, content, and construct validity, conducted with 216 healthcare staff. The validity of the modified tool was subsequently confirmed through Confirmatory Factor Analysis, demonstrating favorable fit indices for the job satisfaction item, including a Chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio of 3.15, Comparative Fit Index of 0.86, Tucker Lewis Index of 0.85, and Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation of 0.1. Additionally, the modified tool exhibited a high Cronbach's alpha of 0.97, a good convergence ranged from 0.4 to 0.6 and a good divergence with the maximum shared variance values were lower than the corresponding average variance extracted values. The job satisfaction scores obtained using the modified tool surpassed significantly those of the original reference tool (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with percentages of 52.7% and 43.1%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This contextualization procedure has been demonstrated to be both feasible, practical and yielded valid and reliable results, thus recommending its adoption in other healthcare settings along with further validation and adaptation, including rural settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":21398,"journal":{"name":"SAGE Open Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"20503121241292676"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11528810/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAGE Open Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121241292676","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Extensive scrutiny within organizational research has positioned job satisfaction as a pivotal factor contingent upon organizational contexts. Our study aimed to refine job satisfaction measurement tools for diverse healthcare settings using insights from a university hospital in Vietnam, enhancing the validity and applicability of these instruments.

Methods: The procedure for the contextualization of a job satisfaction measurement tool was established encompassing six key steps: (1) Developing, selecting, or modifying the questionnaire; (2) Assessing face validity; (3) Ensuring content validity; (4) Designing the research for field testing; (5) Assessing the tool reliability and validity; and (6) Assessing discriminant validity between two tools. This procedure served as the foundation for a cross-sectional study involving 216 healthcare staff at a university hospital in Vietnam.

Results: The modified tool, comprising 35 items (6 fewer than the original 41-item reference tool), was derived through evaluations of face, content, and construct validity, conducted with 216 healthcare staff. The validity of the modified tool was subsequently confirmed through Confirmatory Factor Analysis, demonstrating favorable fit indices for the job satisfaction item, including a Chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio of 3.15, Comparative Fit Index of 0.86, Tucker Lewis Index of 0.85, and Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation of 0.1. Additionally, the modified tool exhibited a high Cronbach's alpha of 0.97, a good convergence ranged from 0.4 to 0.6 and a good divergence with the maximum shared variance values were lower than the corresponding average variance extracted values. The job satisfaction scores obtained using the modified tool surpassed significantly those of the original reference tool (p < 0.01), with percentages of 52.7% and 43.1%, respectively.

Conclusion: This contextualization procedure has been demonstrated to be both feasible, practical and yielded valid and reliable results, thus recommending its adoption in other healthcare settings along with further validation and adaptation, including rural settings.

加强医疗机构的工作满意度测量工具:越南一所大学医院的启示。
背景和目标:组织研究中的广泛审查已将工作满意度定位为一个取决于组织环境的关键因素。我们的研究旨在利用越南一所大学医院的经验,完善适用于不同医疗环境的工作满意度测量工具,从而提高这些工具的有效性和适用性:方法:制定了工作满意度测量工具的情境化程序,包括六个关键步骤:(1) 制定、选择或修改问卷;(2) 评估表面效度;(3) 确保内容效度;(4) 设计实地测试研究;(5) 评估工具的可靠性和有效性;(6) 评估两种工具之间的区分效度。在此基础上,对越南一所大学医院的 216 名医护人员进行了横断面研究:修改后的工具包括 35 个项目(比原来 41 个项目的参考工具少 6 个项目),通过对 216 名医护人员进行面效度、内容效度和结构效度的评估得出。修改后工具的有效性随后通过确认性因子分析得到了证实,显示出工作满意度项目的良好拟合指数,包括奇偶/自由度比为 3.15,比较拟合指数为 0.86,塔克-刘易斯指数为 0.85,近似的均方根误差为 0.1。此外,修改后的工具显示出较高的 Cronbach's Alpha 值(0.97),良好的收敛性(0.4-0.6)和良好的发散性(最大共享方差值低于相应的平均方差提取值)。使用修改后的工具所获得的工作满意度得分明显高于原始参考工具的得分(p 结论):这一情境化程序已被证明是可行的、实用的,并产生了有效和可靠的结果,因此建议在其他医疗环境(包括农村环境)中采用这一程序,并进行进一步验证和调整。
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
SAGE Open Medicine
SAGE Open Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
289
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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