{"title":"意大利护理专业人性化量表的验证。","authors":"Arianna Angelone, Roberto Latina, Giuliano Anastasi, Flavio Marti, Silvia Oggioni, Lucia Mitello, Dhurata Izviku, Irene Terrenato, Anna Rita Marucci","doi":"10.1177/08980101241230289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> The Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale (HUMAS) is a measure of the evaluation of the humanization of care in nursing professions. Despite being validated for the Spanish language, there still needed validation in Italian, which seems essential considering the cultural differences. <b>Aim:</b> We aimed to test the validity and reliability of the HUMAS with an Italian sample of registered nurses. <b>Methods:</b> The present study used cross-sectional data from 300 nurses that completed the survey. The study's main phases were (a) construction of the Italian version; (b) testing and analyzing the psychometric properties of the scale. The exploratory factor analysis and the Content Validity Index (CVI) were performed. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest were used to determine the reliability. <b>Findings:</b> The final Italian version of HUMAS (HUMAS-I) comprised 19 items grouped into five correlated latent factors, accounting for 68.4% of the variance. Additionally, it exhibited a satisfactory Cronbach's alpha for each latent component and an average CVI for the entire scale of 0.68. <b>Conclusions:</b> The HUMAS-I shows acceptable psychometric proprieties as the original Spanish version. Therefore, it could be an advantageous instrument for use in nursing practice and research.</p>","PeriodicalId":51615,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Holistic Nursing","volume":" ","pages":"8980101241230289"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Italian Validation of the Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale for Nursing.\",\"authors\":\"Arianna Angelone, Roberto Latina, Giuliano Anastasi, Flavio Marti, Silvia Oggioni, Lucia Mitello, Dhurata Izviku, Irene Terrenato, Anna Rita Marucci\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08980101241230289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> The Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale (HUMAS) is a measure of the evaluation of the humanization of care in nursing professions. Despite being validated for the Spanish language, there still needed validation in Italian, which seems essential considering the cultural differences. <b>Aim:</b> We aimed to test the validity and reliability of the HUMAS with an Italian sample of registered nurses. <b>Methods:</b> The present study used cross-sectional data from 300 nurses that completed the survey. The study's main phases were (a) construction of the Italian version; (b) testing and analyzing the psychometric properties of the scale. The exploratory factor analysis and the Content Validity Index (CVI) were performed. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest were used to determine the reliability. <b>Findings:</b> The final Italian version of HUMAS (HUMAS-I) comprised 19 items grouped into five correlated latent factors, accounting for 68.4% of the variance. Additionally, it exhibited a satisfactory Cronbach's alpha for each latent component and an average CVI for the entire scale of 0.68. <b>Conclusions:</b> The HUMAS-I shows acceptable psychometric proprieties as the original Spanish version. Therefore, it could be an advantageous instrument for use in nursing practice and research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Holistic Nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"8980101241230289\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Holistic Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08980101241230289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Holistic Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08980101241230289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Italian Validation of the Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale for Nursing.
Purpose: The Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale (HUMAS) is a measure of the evaluation of the humanization of care in nursing professions. Despite being validated for the Spanish language, there still needed validation in Italian, which seems essential considering the cultural differences. Aim: We aimed to test the validity and reliability of the HUMAS with an Italian sample of registered nurses. Methods: The present study used cross-sectional data from 300 nurses that completed the survey. The study's main phases were (a) construction of the Italian version; (b) testing and analyzing the psychometric properties of the scale. The exploratory factor analysis and the Content Validity Index (CVI) were performed. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest were used to determine the reliability. Findings: The final Italian version of HUMAS (HUMAS-I) comprised 19 items grouped into five correlated latent factors, accounting for 68.4% of the variance. Additionally, it exhibited a satisfactory Cronbach's alpha for each latent component and an average CVI for the entire scale of 0.68. Conclusions: The HUMAS-I shows acceptable psychometric proprieties as the original Spanish version. Therefore, it could be an advantageous instrument for use in nursing practice and research.
期刊介绍：
Manuscripts are solicited that deal with the processes of knowledge development and application including research, concept analysis and theory development, practical applications of research and theory, clinical case studies and analysis, practice applications in general, educational approaches and evaluation, and aesthetic expressions of holistic knowledge. While the journal seeks to support work grounded in evidence, the editorial philosophy suggests that there are many diverse sources of “evidence” beyond the realm of what is called “empirical” and that many methods are appropriate for discovering evidence and generating knowledge.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
