老年人用药知识测试:新工具的心理测量分析和标准化。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Laís Lessa Neiva Pantuzza, Adriano Max Moreira Reis, Stephanie Ferreira Botelho, Ana Luiza Pereira da Rocha, Maria Auxiliadora Parreiras Martins, Mariana Martins Gonzaga do Nascimento, Liliana Batista Vieira, Ronara Camila de Souza Groia Veloso, Elizabeth do Nascimento
{"title":"老年人用药知识测试:新工具的心理测量分析和标准化。","authors":"Laís Lessa Neiva Pantuzza, Adriano Max Moreira Reis, Stephanie Ferreira Botelho, Ana Luiza Pereira da Rocha, Maria Auxiliadora Parreiras Martins, Mariana Martins Gonzaga do Nascimento, Liliana Batista Vieira, Ronara Camila de Souza Groia Veloso, Elizabeth do Nascimento","doi":"10.1007/s11096-024-01744-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low medication literacy is prevalent among older adults and is associated with adverse drug events. The Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults (TELUMI) was developed and content validated in a previously published study.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the psychometric properties and provide norms for TELUMI scores.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This was a cross-sectional methodological study with older adults selected from the community and from two outpatient services. Descriptive item-analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), item response theory (IRT), reliability, and validity analysis with schooling and health literacy were performed to test the psychometric properties of the TELUMI. The classification of the TELUMI scores was performed using percentile norms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 344 participants, with a mean age of 68.7 years (standard deviation = 6.7), were included; most were female (66.6%), black/brown (61.8%), had low schooling level (60.2%) and low income (55.2%). The EFA pointed to the one-dimensional structure of TELUMI. A three-parameter logistic model was adopted for IRT. All items had an adequate difficulty index. One item had discrimination < 0.65, and three items had an unacceptable guessing index (< 0.35) and were excluded. The 29-item version of TELUMI had excellent internal consistency (KR20 = 0.89). There was a positive and strong association between TELUMI scores and health literacy and education level. The scores were classified as inadequate medication literacy (≤ 10.0 points), medium medication literacy (11-20 points), and adequate medication literacy (≥ 21 points).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results suggest that the 29-item version of TELUMI is psychometrically adequate for measuring medication literacy in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults: psychometric analysis and standardization of the new instrument.\",\"authors\":\"Laís Lessa Neiva Pantuzza, Adriano Max Moreira Reis, Stephanie Ferreira Botelho, Ana Luiza Pereira da Rocha, Maria Auxiliadora Parreiras Martins, Mariana Martins Gonzaga do Nascimento, Liliana Batista Vieira, Ronara Camila de Souza Groia Veloso, Elizabeth do Nascimento\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11096-024-01744-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low medication literacy is prevalent among older adults and is associated with adverse drug events. The Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults (TELUMI) was developed and content validated in a previously published study.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the psychometric properties and provide norms for TELUMI scores.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This was a cross-sectional methodological study with older adults selected from the community and from two outpatient services. Descriptive item-analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), item response theory (IRT), reliability, and validity analysis with schooling and health literacy were performed to test the psychometric properties of the TELUMI. The classification of the TELUMI scores was performed using percentile norms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 344 participants, with a mean age of 68.7 years (standard deviation = 6.7), were included; most were female (66.6%), black/brown (61.8%), had low schooling level (60.2%) and low income (55.2%). The EFA pointed to the one-dimensional structure of TELUMI. A three-parameter logistic model was adopted for IRT. All items had an adequate difficulty index. One item had discrimination < 0.65, and three items had an unacceptable guessing index (< 0.35) and were excluded. The 29-item version of TELUMI had excellent internal consistency (KR20 = 0.89). There was a positive and strong association between TELUMI scores and health literacy and education level. The scores were classified as inadequate medication literacy (≤ 10.0 points), medium medication literacy (11-20 points), and adequate medication literacy (≥ 21 points).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results suggest that the 29-item version of TELUMI is psychometrically adequate for measuring medication literacy in older adults.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01744-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01744-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:老年人普遍存在用药知识不足的问题,这与药物不良反应有关。老年人用药知识测试(TELUMI)是在之前发表的一项研究中开发并经过内容验证的。目的:评估TELUMI的心理测量特性,并提供TELUMI分数的标准:这是一项横断面方法学研究,研究对象是从社区和两个门诊服务机构挑选出来的老年人。通过描述性项目分析、探索性因素分析(EFA)、项目反应理论(IRT)、信度和效度分析,结合学校教育和健康素养,对 TELUMI 的心理测量特性进行了测试。采用百分位数标准对TELUMI得分进行了分类:共纳入 344 名参与者,平均年龄为 68.7 岁(标准差 = 6.7);大多数为女性(66.6%)、黑人/棕色人种(61.8%)、低学历(60.2%)和低收入(55.2%)。EFA 结果表明,TELUMI 具有一维结构。IRT 采用了三参数逻辑模型。所有项目都有适当的难度指数。有一个项目存在辨别结论:结果表明,29 个条目版本的 TELUMI 在心理测量学上足以测量老年人的用药知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults: psychometric analysis and standardization of the new instrument.

Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults: psychometric analysis and standardization of the new instrument.

Background: Low medication literacy is prevalent among older adults and is associated with adverse drug events. The Medication Literacy Test for Older Adults (TELUMI) was developed and content validated in a previously published study.

Aim: To evaluate the psychometric properties and provide norms for TELUMI scores.

Method: This was a cross-sectional methodological study with older adults selected from the community and from two outpatient services. Descriptive item-analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), item response theory (IRT), reliability, and validity analysis with schooling and health literacy were performed to test the psychometric properties of the TELUMI. The classification of the TELUMI scores was performed using percentile norms.

Results: A total of 344 participants, with a mean age of 68.7 years (standard deviation = 6.7), were included; most were female (66.6%), black/brown (61.8%), had low schooling level (60.2%) and low income (55.2%). The EFA pointed to the one-dimensional structure of TELUMI. A three-parameter logistic model was adopted for IRT. All items had an adequate difficulty index. One item had discrimination < 0.65, and three items had an unacceptable guessing index (< 0.35) and were excluded. The 29-item version of TELUMI had excellent internal consistency (KR20 = 0.89). There was a positive and strong association between TELUMI scores and health literacy and education level. The scores were classified as inadequate medication literacy (≤ 10.0 points), medium medication literacy (11-20 points), and adequate medication literacy (≥ 21 points).

Conclusion: The results suggest that the 29-item version of TELUMI is psychometrically adequate for measuring medication literacy in older adults.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
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