Development and Testing of an Instrument to Measure Moral Distress in Healthcare Professionals

A. Hamric, C. Borchers, E. Epstein
{"title":"Development and Testing of an Instrument to Measure Moral Distress in Healthcare Professionals","authors":"A. Hamric, C. Borchers, E. Epstein","doi":"10.1080/21507716.2011.652337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Although moral distress is increasingly recognized as an important problem that threatens the integrity of health care providers and health care systems, few reliable and valid measures of moral distress are currently in use in research or clinical practice. This article describes the development and testing of a revised measure of moral distress, the Moral Distress Scale–Revised (MDS-R), designed for use in multiple health care settings and with multiple disciplines. Methods: After instrument development and content validity testing, a survey methodology was used to assess reliability and construct validity of the MDS-R. Registered nurses (n = 169) and physicians (n = 37) in eight intensive care units (ICUs) at an academic medical center in the southeastern United States participated; the survey was administered during a 2-week period in January 2011. Results: Adequate reliability and evidence of construct validity were demonstrated. Moral distress was significantly higher for nurses than physicians, although it was negatively correlated with ethical climate for both provider groups. MDS-R scores were significantly higher for those clinicians considering leaving their positions. The proportion of physicians and nurses who had left a previous position or who were considering leaving their current positions due to moral distress was high (16% and 31%, respectively). Conclusions: Initial testing of the MDS-R reveals promising evidence of instrument reliability and validity. The findings from this study lend further support to the important relationships between the moral distress of providers, the ethical climate of health care settings, and retention of health care professionals.","PeriodicalId":89316,"journal":{"name":"AJOB primary research","volume":"33 1","pages":"1 - 9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"411","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB primary research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2011.652337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 411

Abstract

Background: Although moral distress is increasingly recognized as an important problem that threatens the integrity of health care providers and health care systems, few reliable and valid measures of moral distress are currently in use in research or clinical practice. This article describes the development and testing of a revised measure of moral distress, the Moral Distress Scale–Revised (MDS-R), designed for use in multiple health care settings and with multiple disciplines. Methods: After instrument development and content validity testing, a survey methodology was used to assess reliability and construct validity of the MDS-R. Registered nurses (n = 169) and physicians (n = 37) in eight intensive care units (ICUs) at an academic medical center in the southeastern United States participated; the survey was administered during a 2-week period in January 2011. Results: Adequate reliability and evidence of construct validity were demonstrated. Moral distress was significantly higher for nurses than physicians, although it was negatively correlated with ethical climate for both provider groups. MDS-R scores were significantly higher for those clinicians considering leaving their positions. The proportion of physicians and nurses who had left a previous position or who were considering leaving their current positions due to moral distress was high (16% and 31%, respectively). Conclusions: Initial testing of the MDS-R reveals promising evidence of instrument reliability and validity. The findings from this study lend further support to the important relationships between the moral distress of providers, the ethical climate of health care settings, and retention of health care professionals.
一种测量医疗保健专业人员道德困扰的工具的开发和测试
背景:尽管道德困扰日益被认为是威胁卫生保健提供者和卫生保健系统完整性的一个重要问题,但目前在研究或临床实践中使用的道德困扰可靠有效的措施很少。本文描述了一种修订后的道德痛苦测量方法的开发和测试,即修订后的道德痛苦量表(MDS-R),该量表设计用于多个医疗保健机构和多个学科。方法:采用问卷调查法,经量表开发和内容效度检验,对量表的信度和结构效度进行评估。美国东南部一家学术医疗中心的8个重症监护病房(icu)的注册护士(n = 169)和医生(n = 37)参与了研究;该调查于2011年1月进行,为期两周。结果:具有足够的信度和结构效度证据。护士的道德困扰明显高于医生,尽管它与两个提供者群体的道德氛围呈负相关。考虑离职的临床医生的MDS-R得分明显更高。由于道德困境而离职或考虑离职的医生和护士比例很高(分别为16%和31%)。结论:MDS-R的初步测试显示了仪器的可靠性和有效性。本研究的结果进一步支持了提供者的道德困境、卫生保健环境的道德氛围和卫生保健专业人员的保留之间的重要关系。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信