{"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}
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.
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.