Jian Mo, Ying Mo, Jiale He, Bu Yang, Xieyuan Jiang, Lei He, Shuai Lu, Wenbin Wu, Mao Pang, Feng Feng, Peigen Xie, Shunwu Fan, Limin Rong
{"title":"中国骨科医生骨质疏松症客观和主观知识工具的开发与验证","authors":"Jian Mo, Ying Mo, Jiale He, Bu Yang, Xieyuan Jiang, Lei He, Shuai Lu, Wenbin Wu, Mao Pang, Feng Feng, Peigen Xie, Shunwu Fan, Limin Rong","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.01136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinicians must be knowledgeable about osteoporosis so that they can convey information regarding the prevention of fragility fractures to their patients. The purposes of this study were to develop objective and subjective knowledge instruments for osteoporosis and fragility fractures and then test their reliability and validity among Chinese orthopaedic surgeons.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 2-round procedure was used to develop the objective and subjective knowledge instruments. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to 293 orthopaedic surgeons; 189 surgeons returned the questionnaires. We examined internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity; we also compared the subjective knowledge level with the objective knowledge level among surgeons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results showed that the Subjective Knowledge Scale (SKS) regarding Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures had a high Cronbach alpha coefficient (0.915), and the objective Osteoporosis Knowledge Test for Clinicians (OKTC) had an adequate Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient (0.64). Item analyses were conducted, and a short version of the OKTC (the OKTC-SF) was developed. The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all showed good test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity. The percentage of surgeons with a high subjective knowledge level was higher than the percentage of surgeons who selected the correct answer for several corresponding questions related to objective knowledge.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all demonstrated good reliability and validity. However, the orthopaedic surgeons may have overestimated their knowledge level regarding osteoporosis. Targeted continuing medical education that is based on individual knowledge level is needed to improve the undertreatment of osteoporosis among patients with fragility fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and Validation of Objective and Subjective Osteoporosis Knowledge Instruments Among Chinese Orthopaedic Surgeons.\",\"authors\":\"Jian Mo, Ying Mo, Jiale He, Bu Yang, Xieyuan Jiang, Lei He, Shuai Lu, Wenbin Wu, Mao Pang, Feng Feng, Peigen Xie, Shunwu Fan, Limin Rong\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.23.01136\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinicians must be knowledgeable about osteoporosis so that they can convey information regarding the prevention of fragility fractures to their patients. The purposes of this study were to develop objective and subjective knowledge instruments for osteoporosis and fragility fractures and then test their reliability and validity among Chinese orthopaedic surgeons.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 2-round procedure was used to develop the objective and subjective knowledge instruments. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to 293 orthopaedic surgeons; 189 surgeons returned the questionnaires. We examined internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity; we also compared the subjective knowledge level with the objective knowledge level among surgeons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results showed that the Subjective Knowledge Scale (SKS) regarding Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures had a high Cronbach alpha coefficient (0.915), and the objective Osteoporosis Knowledge Test for Clinicians (OKTC) had an adequate Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient (0.64). Item analyses were conducted, and a short version of the OKTC (the OKTC-SF) was developed. The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all showed good test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity. The percentage of surgeons with a high subjective knowledge level was higher than the percentage of surgeons who selected the correct answer for several corresponding questions related to objective knowledge.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all demonstrated good reliability and validity. However, the orthopaedic surgeons may have overestimated their knowledge level regarding osteoporosis. Targeted continuing medical education that is based on individual knowledge level is needed to improve the undertreatment of osteoporosis among patients with fragility fractures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01136\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01136","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Development and Validation of Objective and Subjective Osteoporosis Knowledge Instruments Among Chinese Orthopaedic Surgeons.
Background: Clinicians must be knowledgeable about osteoporosis so that they can convey information regarding the prevention of fragility fractures to their patients. The purposes of this study were to develop objective and subjective knowledge instruments for osteoporosis and fragility fractures and then test their reliability and validity among Chinese orthopaedic surgeons.
Methods: A 2-round procedure was used to develop the objective and subjective knowledge instruments. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to 293 orthopaedic surgeons; 189 surgeons returned the questionnaires. We examined internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity; we also compared the subjective knowledge level with the objective knowledge level among surgeons.
Results: Our results showed that the Subjective Knowledge Scale (SKS) regarding Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures had a high Cronbach alpha coefficient (0.915), and the objective Osteoporosis Knowledge Test for Clinicians (OKTC) had an adequate Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient (0.64). Item analyses were conducted, and a short version of the OKTC (the OKTC-SF) was developed. The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all showed good test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and discriminant validity. The percentage of surgeons with a high subjective knowledge level was higher than the percentage of surgeons who selected the correct answer for several corresponding questions related to objective knowledge.
Conclusions: The SKS, the OKTC, and the OKTC-SF all demonstrated good reliability and validity. However, the orthopaedic surgeons may have overestimated their knowledge level regarding osteoporosis. Targeted continuing medical education that is based on individual knowledge level is needed to improve the undertreatment of osteoporosis among patients with fragility fractures.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
