Validación de un cuestionario para evaluar la cultura de seguridad del paciente en directivos de la salud: propiedades psicométricas y usabilidad

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
G. Garzón González, L.M. Parra Ramírez
{"title":"Validación de un cuestionario para evaluar la cultura de seguridad del paciente en directivos de la salud: propiedades psicométricas y usabilidad","authors":"G. Garzón González,&nbsp;L.M. Parra Ramírez","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2023.09.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To validate a reduced and applicable to distinct location version of the only validated questionnaire of patient safety culture in managers in Spanish language.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Questionnaire validation study. Community of Madrid 2022. Reduction/adaptation of the original questionnaire: Giménez-Aibar-Gutiérrez, 2013 Questionnaire was reduced from 85 items to 25; those local or not applicable were removed. Pre-test: Semi-structured survey on comprehension and response scale. There was no need to modify the questionnaire. Validation: It was tested in 39 primary care managers without care activity. Internal consistency (α Cronbach), content validity (experts) and construct validity (factor analysis) were analysed. Usability analysis: Survey on time spent and non-response rate.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.894. Content validity: Experts deemed questionnaire was complete. Factor analysis: five factors explain 68% of variance. The factors corresponded to the dimensions of the theoretical construct. Factors, internal consistency of each and correlation with global score were: commitment with patient safety: α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.793, <em>r</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.778; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001; procedures/reporting: α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.83, <em>r</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.806; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001; attitudes with patient safety: α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.766, <em>r</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.596; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001; clinicians involving: α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.773, <em>r</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.798; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001; patient safety communication: α Cronbach<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.615, <em>r</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.518; <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.001; usability survey: 95% thought spent time was adequate. Non-response rate was 0%, except one item.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this work, a reduced and adapted version of questionnaire of Giménez-Aibar-Gutiérrez was validated at distinct location (Madrid region). Psychometric properties and usability, which were found, suggest that the reduced questionnaire is a reliable, valid and usable instrument to assess patient safety culture in managers of any place.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2603647923000520","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 validate a reduced and applicable to distinct location version of the only validated questionnaire of patient safety culture in managers in Spanish language.

Method

Questionnaire validation study. Community of Madrid 2022. Reduction/adaptation of the original questionnaire: Giménez-Aibar-Gutiérrez, 2013 Questionnaire was reduced from 85 items to 25; those local or not applicable were removed. Pre-test: Semi-structured survey on comprehension and response scale. There was no need to modify the questionnaire. Validation: It was tested in 39 primary care managers without care activity. Internal consistency (α Cronbach), content validity (experts) and construct validity (factor analysis) were analysed. Usability analysis: Survey on time spent and non-response rate.

Results

α Cronbach = 0.894. Content validity: Experts deemed questionnaire was complete. Factor analysis: five factors explain 68% of variance. The factors corresponded to the dimensions of the theoretical construct. Factors, internal consistency of each and correlation with global score were: commitment with patient safety: α Cronbach = 0.793, r = 0.778; P < .001; procedures/reporting: α Cronbach = 0.83, r = 0.806; P < .001; attitudes with patient safety: α Cronbach = 0.766, r = 0.596; P < .001; clinicians involving: α Cronbach = 0.773, r = 0.798; P < .001; patient safety communication: α Cronbach = 0.615, r = 0.518; P = .001; usability survey: 95% thought spent time was adequate. Non-response rate was 0%, except one item.

Conclusion

In this work, a reduced and adapted version of questionnaire of Giménez-Aibar-Gutiérrez was validated at distinct location (Madrid region). Psychometric properties and usability, which were found, suggest that the reduced questionnaire is a reliable, valid and usable instrument to assess patient safety culture in managers of any place.

评估卫生管理人员患者安全文化问卷的验证:心理测量特性和可用性
目的验证西班牙语管理者中唯一经验证的患者安全文化问卷的简化版和适用于不同地点的版本。方法问卷验证研究。马德里社区2022。减少/调整原始调查表:Giménez-Aibar Gutiérrez,2013年调查表从85项减少到25项;那些本地或不适用的被删除。测试前:关于理解和反应量表的半结构化调查。没有必要修改调查表。验证:在39名没有护理活动的初级保健管理人员中进行了测试。分析了内部一致性(αCronbach)、内容有效性(专家)和结构有效性(因子分析)。可用性分析:调查花费的时间和未响应率。结果αCronbach=0.894。内容有效性:专家认为问卷是完整的。因子分析:五个因子解释了68%的方差。这些因素与理论结构的维度相对应。因素、每个因素的内部一致性以及与总体评分的相关性为:对患者安全的承诺:αCronbach=0.793,r=0.778;P<;.001;程序/报告:αCronbach=0.83,r=0.806;P<;.001;对患者安全的态度:αCronbach=0.766,r=0.596;P<;.001;临床医生参与:αCronbach=0.773,r=0.798;P<;.001;患者安全沟通:αCronbach=0.615,r=0.518;P=.001;可用性调查:95%的人认为花时间是足够的。除一项外,无应答率为0%。结论在这项工作中,Giménez-Aibar Gutiérrez问卷的简化和改编版本在不同的地点(马德里地区)得到了验证。所发现的心理测量特性和可用性表明,简化的问卷是评估任何地方管理者患者安全文化的可靠、有效和可用的工具。
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