Search

The design and validation of tools constitutes a fundamental pillar of nursing research, where it is essential to incorporate the most current methodologies and analyses in order to guarantee validity and reliability in their clinical application. The aim of this paper is to describe the characteristics of the Rasch analysis and the methodology for its development as well as to discuss its relevance and applicability in nursing research, highlighting its potential contribution to the improvement of the quality and accuracy of measurement instruments in the discipline. Through a narrative synthesis, the theoretical foundations of Rasch analysis are described and the characteristics and assumptions that must be fulfilled to carry out this type of analysis are presented. Subsequently, the implementation methodology is presented in 11 steps: definition of objectives and preparation, instrument design, data collection, initial and unidimensionality analysis, goodness-of-fit assessment (infit-outfit, reliability and separation), item local independence assessment (Yen's Q3 coefficient), item calibration and estimation of skills, measurement invariance analysis (DIF analysis), review and modification of the instrument, final analysis and validation, interpretation of results. Examples of use are presented, as well as the advantages and limitations of the method. In conclusion, the Rasch analysis provides a valuable methodology for the evaluation of clinical competencies and skills, as well as for the development and validation of measurement instruments of great utility for research in care, although it would be necessary to promote training and standardization in its use., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier España S.L.U.)

Objective: To establish the construct validity of the Spanish version of the BARRIERS scale., Method: Methodological study of validation of a measurement instrument based on data from previously published studies. The study population consisted of nurses from the Basque Health Service and the Canary Health Service. The following variables were extracted and unified: Years of professional experience, possession of a specialist nursing degree, possession of a doctorate, type of activity performed by the professional and field of work. For construct validation, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed based on the initial model proposed for the scale and RASCH analysis. A polychoric correlation matrix, factor extraction by unweighted least squares and PROMIN oblique rotation were used. For the RASCH analysis, the Joint Maximun Likelihood estimation (JMLE) method was used; the fit of the items and persons were estimated by means of outfit - Unweighted Mean Square fit statistic (UMS) and infit -Weighted Mean Square Fit Statistic (WMS), as well as the reliability and separation of items and persons., Results: A total of 1200 nurses and midwives made up the final validation sample (n = 1200), with a mean professional experience of 21.22 ± 9.26 years. The CFA presented a good fit to the data (KMO = 0.935 [95% CI: 0.921-0.945]), changing the factorial assignment in 6 items, while 5 items received factorial scores in more than one factor. The fit values for the 4-factor solution were RMSEA = 0.026 [95% CI: 0.026-0.027] and GFI = 0.991 [95% CI: 0.986-0.991]. In the RASCH analysis most items presented infit-WMS and outfit-UMS values with a good fit., Conclusions: The Spanish version of the BARRIERS scale has adequate construct validity although there are changes in the assignment of items to the dimensions compared to the original model. The RASCH analysis indicates adequate fit for both persons and items., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers associated with research among nurses and midwives of the Canary Health Service (SCS)., Methods: Descriptive observational cross-sectional study with an analytical component carried out in the different SCS departments by means of an online survey in which sociodemographic and specific variables, the Spanish version of the Attitudes towards Research and Development within Nursing Questionnaire (ATRDNQ-e) instrument and the BARRIERS scale were collected. Authorisation was obtained from the two provincial ethics committees. A descriptive and inferential analysis (Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test, post hoc contrast by Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligne test) was performed with JAMOVI® v.2.3.24 software., Results: A total of 512 nurses and midwives with a mean age of 41.82 years participated in the study. Regarding the scores with the ATRDNQ-e instrument, the dimension with the lowest score was «Language of research» (mean = 3.55/SD = 0.84) and the highest «Assessment of nursing research and development of the nursing discipline» (mean = 4.54/SD = 0.52). The total mean score with the BARRIERS scale was 54.33 (SD = 16.52), with «Organizational characteristics» being the highest scoring subscale (mean = 17.25/SD = 5.90). The two highest perceived barriers were «Not enough time at work to implement new ideas» (mean = 2.55/SD = 1.11) and «Nursing does not have time to read research» (mean = 2.46/ SD = 1.11)., Conclusions: SCS nurses have a positive attitude towards research, although there are some barriers where improvement actions for nursing research should be implemented., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Objectives: To carry out a cross-cultural adaptation of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) questionnaire to the Spanish context, and to evaluate its content validity (CVI)., Methods: The translation and cultural adaptation of a measuring instrument by means of translation and back translation conducted through the participation of 20 health professionals. The content validation was carried out through the participation of 10 experts. The content validity of each item (CVI-I), the content validity index per expert (CVI-E) and the content validity total (CVI-T) were calculated for the questionnaire. Corrections were carried out for probable random agreement and the statistical calculation Kappa (K*) modified for each item of the instrument., Results: The final instrument obtained (SVEST-E) has a CVI-Total of 0.87 and consists of 36 total items, subdivided into 7 dimensions, 2 outcome variables and a support option section maintaining the same structure as the original questionnaire. Thirty items had a CVI-I with values over ≥°0.79., Conclusions: The SVEST-E questionnaire is an equivalent of the original and is an instrument that could help to evaluate the second victim experiences of healthcare professionals in our country. It is an instrument with adequate content validity to measure the experience of second victims in health professionals in our country., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To carry out a cross-cultural adaptation of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) questionnaire to the Spanish context, and to evaluate its content validity (CVI)., Methods: The translation and cultural adaptation of a measuring instrument by means of translation and back translation conducted through the participation of 20 health professionals. The content validation was carried out through the participation of 10 experts. The content validity of each item (CVI-I), the content validity index per expert (CVI-E) and the content validity total (CVI-T) were calculated for the questionnaire. Corrections were carried out for probable random agreement and the statistical calculation Kappa (K*) modified for each item of the instrument., Results: The final instrument obtained (SVEST-E) has a CVI-Total of 0.87 and consists of 36 total items, subdivided into 7 dimensions, 2 outcome variables and a support option section maintaining the same structure as the original questionnaire. Thirty items had a CVI-I with values over ≥̊0.79., Conclusions: The SVEST-E questionnaire is an equivalent of the original and is an instrument that could help to evaluate the second victim experiences of healthcare professionals in our country. It is an instrument with adequate content validity to measure the experience of second victims in health professionals in our country., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To compile recommendations and evidence on the practical management of pregnant women with COVID-19 in order to clarify standards of obstetric care in the face of this new disease., Method: Scoping review based on literature searches in national and international health science databases (PubMed/Medline, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud, SciELO, Cochrane and CUIDEN) and websites, and additionally by a "snowball" system. MeSH terms were used: "COVID-19", "Pregnancy", "Delivery, Obstetric", "Pregnant Women" and "Maternal". As limits in the search Spanish and English languages were selected. No limits were established in relation to the year of publication or type of article., Results: A total of 49 documents and articles were detected, of which 27 were analyzed, 18 were used, and 9 were discarded because they did not contain practical recommendations. The recommendations were grouped into 10 subjects: Prevention of infection in pregnant women; prevention of infection in health care personnel attending pregnant women; form of presentation and severity in pregnant women; maternal-fetal transmission (vertical and perinatal); maternal-fetal control of the pregnant woman with COVID-19; control of the severely pregnant woman with COVID-19; treatment of the pregnant woman with COVID-19; management and route of termination of labor; neonatal outcomes in women with COVID-19, and breastfeeding., Conclusions: Lack of strong evidence to support many of the recommendations for pregnant women with COVID-19, as they are based on previous experience with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infections. Further studies are needed to confirm the appropriateness of many of the recommendations and guidelines for action in the specific case of pregnant women and COVID-19., (© 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the degree of satisfaction of women after childbirth at the Hospital Universitario Materno-Infantil of Gran Canaria (HUMIC) and to establish possible relationships between the degree of satisfaction and the variables studied., Method: A cross-sectional, descriptive, observational study with an analytical component. The study population comprised women who gave birth at the HUMIC in November 2018, recruited through consecutive non-probabilistic sampling. The Spanish version of the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ-E) was used (questionnaire with 4 domains: own capacity', professional support, perceived safety and participation/analytical model 2). In a first phase a descriptive analysis was made, and in a second phase an inferential analysis to explore the association between different variables., Results: The total sample comprised 257 women (n=257). The total score using the CEQ was 3.24 (SD .37 points). No statistically significant differences were found in the final CEQ score between the women who had a spontaneous delivery versus induction-stimulation (P=.563) or between primiparous versus multiparous women (P=.060). The women whose labour lasted 12hours or less (P=.024), without perineal trauma (P=.021) and those who had not undergone episiotomy (P=.002) achieved a better final CEQ score. Instrumental delivery (forceps) versus normal delivery is associated with lower scores with respect to the final CEQ-E score (P=≤.001)., Conclusions: Women's overall satisfaction after delivery in HUMIC was high. Instrumental delivery seems to be associated with lower perceived satisfaction. Aspects such as fear and fatigue in labour could affect satisfaction negatively. These aspects can be improved by establishing strategies to increase comfort and minimise pregnant women's fear of labour., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the level of self-care in the population with diabetes and determine the risk of diabetic foot lesions through the use of 3stratification systems as well as to establish the degree of concordance between these systems., Method: Observational, cross-sectional and descriptive study carried out in the Basic Health Area of Santa Brígida (Gran Canaria-Canary Islands-Spain) in people diagnosed with diabetes (DM Type 1/DM Type 2) (n=182). Interview, physical examination, review of clinical history and completion of the Diabetic Foot Self-Care questionnaire of the University of Malaga were carried out. The risk stratification was then calculated using 3systems (System of the National Institute for Health Care Excellence, Classification of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot and High-Risk Diabetic Foot-60-Second Tool©-2012). The Kappa index was calculated to study the concordance between systems, the relative risk of negative screening of one method against another was estimated and the exact Fisher test to establish whether there were differences., Results: 30.2% of diabetics had a low level of self-care, 45.1% a medium level and 24.7% a high level. The risk levels calculated were: National Institute for Health Care Excellence Classification (Negative Risk 71.4%-Positive Risk 28.6%), International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot Classification (Negative Risk 67.0%-Positive Risk 33.0%) and High-Risk Diabetic Foot-60-Second Tool© (Negative Risk 62.6%-Positive Risk 37.4%)., Conclusions: All 3systems have good concordance with each other. The High-Risk Diabetic Foot-60-Second Tool© only distinguishes 2levels of risk but detects a higher percentage of people at risk. The Diabetic Foot Self-Care questionnaire of the University of Malaga may be useful in the context of Primary Care to assess the level of self-care of people with diabetes., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)