卫生保健教育与实践中道德困扰量表的心理测量学发展。

IF 2.9 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Frontiers in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-09-26 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1661414
Hung-Chang Liao, Ya-Huei Wang
{"title":"卫生保健教育与实践中道德困扰量表的心理测量学发展。","authors":"Hung-Chang Liao, Ya-Huei Wang","doi":"10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1661414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Unaddressed moral distress may result in psychological, emotional, and physical consequences. The study was to develop and validate a Moral Distress Scale for Healthcare Students and Providers (MDS-HSP) within the Taiwanese healthcare education and clinical contexts, providing a framework for administrators and policymakers to recognize and respond to moral distress in training and practice settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following an extensive literature review and expert discussions, the study performed an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using SPSS with a sample of 332 participants to determine the hidden structure of the MDS-HSP and evaluate its initial psychometric properties. A subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS with a separate sample of 240 participants was performed to verify the identified factor structure. The testing process included the assessments of validity, reliability, and goodness-of-fit analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Following the EFA, the initial 72 items were refined to 42 items across six factors: \"acquiescence to patients' rights violations\" (8 items), \"lack of professional competence\" (9 items), \"disrespect for patients' autonomy\" (10 items), \"futile treatment\" (5 items), \"organizational and social climate\" (6 items), and \"not in patients' best interest\" (4 items). The CFA confirmed the same six scale factors and 42 items. Both EFA and CFA supported the proposed factor structure and demonstrated adequate validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study provided empirical evidence supporting the MDS-HSP as a reliable tool for assessing moral distress experienced by healthcare students and providers. Its use may inform educational strategies, institutional policies, and ethical support mechanisms within healthcare and academic settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12525,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Psychology","volume":"16 ","pages":"1661414"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12511084/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric development of a moral distress scale for healthcare education and practice.\",\"authors\":\"Hung-Chang Liao, Ya-Huei Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1661414\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Unaddressed moral distress may result in psychological, emotional, and physical consequences. The study was to develop and validate a Moral Distress Scale for Healthcare Students and Providers (MDS-HSP) within the Taiwanese healthcare education and clinical contexts, providing a framework for administrators and policymakers to recognize and respond to moral distress in training and practice settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following an extensive literature review and expert discussions, the study performed an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using SPSS with a sample of 332 participants to determine the hidden structure of the MDS-HSP and evaluate its initial psychometric properties. A subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS with a separate sample of 240 participants was performed to verify the identified factor structure. The testing process included the assessments of validity, reliability, and goodness-of-fit analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Following the EFA, the initial 72 items were refined to 42 items across six factors: \\\"acquiescence to patients' rights violations\\\" (8 items), \\\"lack of professional competence\\\" (9 items), \\\"disrespect for patients' autonomy\\\" (10 items), \\\"futile treatment\\\" (5 items), \\\"organizational and social climate\\\" (6 items), and \\\"not in patients' best interest\\\" (4 items). The CFA confirmed the same six scale factors and 42 items. Both EFA and CFA supported the proposed factor structure and demonstrated adequate validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study provided empirical evidence supporting the MDS-HSP as a reliable tool for assessing moral distress experienced by healthcare students and providers. Its use may inform educational strategies, institutional policies, and ethical support mechanisms within healthcare and academic settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Psychology\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"1661414\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12511084/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1661414\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1661414","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:未解决的道德困扰可能导致心理、情感和身体上的后果。本研究旨在开发并验证台湾医疗保健教育与临床背景下的医疗保健学生与提供者道德困扰量表(MDS-HSP),为管理者和政策制定者在培训和实践环境中识别和应对道德困扰提供一个框架。方法:通过广泛的文献回顾和专家讨论,利用SPSS软件对332名参与者进行探索性因素分析(EFA),以确定MDS-HSP的隐藏结构,并评估其初始心理测量特性。随后的验证性因子分析(CFA)使用AMOS与240名参与者的单独样本进行,以验证确定的因素结构。测试过程包括效度评估、信度评估和拟合优度分析。结果:在EFA之后,从最初的72个条目细化到42个条目,涉及“默许侵犯患者权利”(8个条目)、“缺乏专业能力”(9个条目)、“不尊重患者自主权”(10个条目)、“无效治疗”(5个条目)、“组织和社会氛围”(6个条目)和“不符合患者最佳利益”(4个条目)六个因素。CFA确认了相同的6个量表因子和42个项目。EFA和CFA均支持所提出的因子结构,并证明了足够的效度和信度。结论:本研究提供了实证证据,支持MDS-HSP作为一种可靠的工具来评估卫生保健学生和提供者所经历的道德困境。它的使用可以为医疗保健和学术环境中的教育策略、制度政策和道德支持机制提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychometric development of a moral distress scale for healthcare education and practice.

Objective: Unaddressed moral distress may result in psychological, emotional, and physical consequences. The study was to develop and validate a Moral Distress Scale for Healthcare Students and Providers (MDS-HSP) within the Taiwanese healthcare education and clinical contexts, providing a framework for administrators and policymakers to recognize and respond to moral distress in training and practice settings.

Methods: Following an extensive literature review and expert discussions, the study performed an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using SPSS with a sample of 332 participants to determine the hidden structure of the MDS-HSP and evaluate its initial psychometric properties. A subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS with a separate sample of 240 participants was performed to verify the identified factor structure. The testing process included the assessments of validity, reliability, and goodness-of-fit analysis.

Results: Following the EFA, the initial 72 items were refined to 42 items across six factors: "acquiescence to patients' rights violations" (8 items), "lack of professional competence" (9 items), "disrespect for patients' autonomy" (10 items), "futile treatment" (5 items), "organizational and social climate" (6 items), and "not in patients' best interest" (4 items). The CFA confirmed the same six scale factors and 42 items. Both EFA and CFA supported the proposed factor structure and demonstrated adequate validity and reliability.

Conclusion: The study provided empirical evidence supporting the MDS-HSP as a reliable tool for assessing moral distress experienced by healthcare students and providers. Its use may inform educational strategies, institutional policies, and ethical support mechanisms within healthcare and academic settings.

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
Frontiers in Psychology
Frontiers in Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
13.20%
发文量
7396
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Psychology is the largest journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across the psychological sciences, from clinical research to cognitive science, from perception to consciousness, from imaging studies to human factors, and from animal cognition to social psychology. Field Chief Editor Axel Cleeremans at the Free University of Brussels is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. The journal publishes the best research across the entire field of psychology. Today, psychological science is becoming increasingly important at all levels of society, from the treatment of clinical disorders to our basic understanding of how the mind works. It is highly interdisciplinary, borrowing questions from philosophy, methods from neuroscience and insights from clinical practice - all in the goal of furthering our grasp of human nature and society, as well as our ability to develop new intervention methods.
×
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