Traumatic breastfeeding experience in women: Scale development, validity and reliability study

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Midwifery Pub Date : 2025-06-07 DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2025.104490

Fatma Nilüfer Topkara , Elif Dağlı , Feyza Aktaş Reyhan

{"title":"Traumatic breastfeeding experience in women: Scale development, validity and reliability study","authors":"Fatma Nilüfer Topkara , Elif Dağlı , Feyza Aktaş Reyhan","doi":"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Women’s experiences of breastfeeding, their perspectives on breastfeeding and the meanings they attach to it can be very different. Breastfeeding, which is considered a healthy, physiological and natural process, can be differentiated and become a traumatic experience. In this context, the aim of the study was to develop the Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale and to conduct a validity and reliability study.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This methodological study was conducted with 480 women admitted to the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of a public hospital. Data were collected face-to-face. Both content (content validity index) and construct validity (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis) of the draft scale that the researchers created as a result of the literature review were examined. In the reliability analysis, Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient, item discrimination, item-total score correlations and test-retest method were used.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>As a result of the psychometric analysis, it was concluded that the Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale, which was collected under 5 sub-dimensions and 28 items, is a valid and reliable measurement tool. The Cronbach’s alpha value of the scale was 0.72 and the test-retest reliability was 0.99.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale was found to be a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to assess the prevalence of experience of breastfeeding as traumatic. The scale developed in this direction is recommended to be used in future research and individual clinical evaluations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18495,"journal":{"name":"Midwifery","volume":"148 ","pages":"Article 104490"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825002086","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Women’s experiences of breastfeeding, their perspectives on breastfeeding and the meanings they attach to it can be very different. Breastfeeding, which is considered a healthy, physiological and natural process, can be differentiated and become a traumatic experience. In this context, the aim of the study was to develop the Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale and to conduct a validity and reliability study.

Methods

This methodological study was conducted with 480 women admitted to the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of a public hospital. Data were collected face-to-face. Both content (content validity index) and construct validity (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis) of the draft scale that the researchers created as a result of the literature review were examined. In the reliability analysis, Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient, item discrimination, item-total score correlations and test-retest method were used.

Results

As a result of the psychometric analysis, it was concluded that the Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale, which was collected under 5 sub-dimensions and 28 items, is a valid and reliable measurement tool. The Cronbach’s alpha value of the scale was 0.72 and the test-retest reliability was 0.99.

Conclusions

The Traumatic Breastfeeding Experience Scale was found to be a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to assess the prevalence of experience of breastfeeding as traumatic. The scale developed in this direction is recommended to be used in future research and individual clinical evaluations.

查看原文本刊更多论文

妇女创伤性母乳喂养经历：量表开发、效度与信度研究

女性的母乳喂养经历、她们对母乳喂养的看法以及她们赋予母乳喂养的意义可能非常不同。母乳喂养被认为是一种健康、生理和自然的过程，但可以加以区分，成为一种创伤性经历。在此背景下，本研究的目的是制定创伤性母乳喂养经历量表，并进行效度和信度研究。方法对某公立医院妇产科门诊480名住院妇女进行方法学研究。数据是面对面收集的。对研究人员根据文献综述编制的初稿量表的内容（内容效度指标）和结构效度（探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析）进行检验。信度分析采用Cronbach’s alpha信度系数、项目辨别力、项目总分相关性和重测法。结果经心理测量分析，创伤性母乳喂养体验量表是一种有效、可靠的测量工具，共分为5个子维度28个条目。量表的Cronbach’s alpha值为0.72，重测信度为0.99。结论创伤性母乳喂养体验量表是一种有效、可靠的测评工具，可用于评估创伤性母乳喂养体验的普遍程度。建议在未来的研究和个人临床评估中使用该方向开发的量表。

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

Midwifery 医学-护理

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

7.40%

发文量

221

审稿时长

13.4 weeks

期刊介绍： Midwifery publishes the latest peer reviewed international research to inform the safety, quality, outcomes and experiences of pregnancy, birth and maternity care for childbearing women, their babies and families. The journal’s publications support midwives and maternity care providers to explore and develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes informed by best available evidence. Midwifery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and discussion of advances in evidence, controversies and current research, and promotes continuing education through publication of systematic and other scholarly reviews and updates. Midwifery articles cover the cultural, clinical, psycho-social, sociological, epidemiological, education, managerial, workforce, organizational and technological areas of practice in preconception, maternal and infant care. The journal welcomes the highest quality scholarly research that employs rigorous methodology. Midwifery is a leading international journal in midwifery and maternal health with a current impact factor of 1.861 (© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2016) and employs a double-blind peer review process.