Search

Aims: The aim of the study was to develop and psychometrically test a new instrument to measure the scope of school nursing practice. Design: Methodological study. Methods: Data were collected in Spring 2018. Frontline school nurses in the United States (N = 3099) completed the 39‐item Scope of School Nursing Practice Tool (SSNPT) with two domains (current practice and importance to practice). One half of sample data (N1 = 1521) were used for exploratory factor analysis, item analysis, Cronbach's alpha, and Spearman–Brown to estimate validity and reliability of the instrument. Sample data from the other half (N2 = 1578) were retained for future analysis. Results: Factor analysis resulted in a stable four‐dimension solution: (A) Using the Nursing Process; (B) Applying Evidence to Improve Practice; (C) Connecting with Community; and (D) Leveraging the School and Family Team, accounting for 50.48% (current practice) and 53.31% (importance to practice) of total variance. Cronbach's alpha and Spearman–Brown ranged from.73 to.90 and.73 to.92, respectively. Item–total correlations ranged from.36 to.82. Conclusion: Initial psychometric properties indicate the new SSNPT is valid and reliable to assess the scope of practice of frontline school nurses. Impact: School nurses play a key role in population health and frequently serve as the sole provider of healthcare in schools worldwide. However, variability in school nursing practice affects the health, safety and educational outcomes of children and youth. No instrument exists that measures the scope of practice of school nurses. Frontline school nurses can use the SSNPT to assess practice, school nurse administrators can use the tool for resource utilization and school nurse researchers can use the tool to examine school nursing practices' impact on student/community health and academic outcomes. The SSNPT may provide a template for others who wish to examine specialty nursing scope of practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The Self‐Care Self‐Efficacy Scale (SCSES) was newly developed as a self‐report measure for self‐care self‐efficacy for chronic illness. This study investigated its measurement equivalence (ME) in different cultural groups, including United States, China (Hong Kong), Italy, and Brazil. Design: A multi‐national study for cross‐cultural validation of the Scale. Methods: From January 2015 ‐ December 2018, investigators recruited 957 patients (United State: 200; Hong Kong: 300; Italy: 285; and Brazil: 142) with chronic illness from inpatient and outpatient settings. The SCSES was administered and clinical and demographic data were collected from participants. Based on the Meredith framework, multi‐group confirmatory factor analysis evaluated the configural, metric, scalar, and strict invariance of the scale across the four populations through a series of nested models, with evaluation of reliability and coherence of the factor solution. Results: The mean ages of the groups ranged from 65–77 years, 56.4% was male. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the single‐factor SCSES were 0.93, 0.89, 0.92, and 0.90 for the United States, China (Hong Kong), Italy, and Brazil, respectively. Three of the four levels of ME were partially or totally supported. The highest level achieved was partial scalar invariance level (χ2 [52] = 313.4, p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.067; 95% CI = 0.056–0.077; CFI = 0.966; TLI = 0.960, SRMR = 0.080). Conclusion: Patients from the four countries shared the same philosophical orientation towards scale items, although some of the items contributed differently to represent the concept and participants shared the same schemata for score interpretation. Impact: Self‐efficacy is important in producing effective and sustainable self‐care behavioural changes. Cultural ideation shapes the ways individuals interpret and report their self‐care self‐efficacy. The study findings support cross‐cultural and cross‐national utility of the SCSES for research on self‐care across United States, China (Hong Kong), Italy, and Brazil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]