Search

Aims and objectives To compare two methods of calculating interrater agreement while determining content validity of the Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire for use with Australian nurses. Background Paediatric pain assessment and management documentation was found to be suboptimal revealing a need to assess paediatric nurses' knowledge and attitude to pain. The Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire was selected as it had been reported as valid and reliable in the United Kingdom with student nurses. The questionnaire required content validity determination prior to use in the Australian context. Design A two phase process of expert review. Methods Ten paediatric nurses completed a relevancy rating of all 68 questionnaire items. In phase two, five pain experts reviewed the items of the questionnaire that scored an unacceptable item level content validity. Item and scale level content validity indices and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated. Results In phase one, 31 items received an item level content validity index <0·78 and the scale level content validity index average was 0·80 which were below levels required for acceptable validity. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0·47. In phase two, 10 items were amended and four items deleted. The revised questionnaire provided a scale level content validity index average >0·90 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0·94 demonstrating excellent agreement between raters therefore acceptable content validity. Conclusion Equivalent outcomes were achieved using the content validity index and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Relevance to clinical practice To assess content validity the content validity index has the advantage of providing an item level score and is a simple calculation. The intraclass correlation coefficient requires statistical knowledge, or support, and has the advantage of accounting for the possibility of chance agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim and objective. To investigate health differences between nurses who report meeting the daily physical activity recommendations in or away from the workplace. Background. Adhering to the national physical activity recommendations has known health benefits. Whilst often considered a workplace active profession, data are emerging of poor health amongst nurses. However, health differences between workplace or leisure-time physically active nurses are understudied. Design. The investigation is an observation study of Australian and New Zealand nurses. Data were generated from the longitudinal, population-based, observational e-Cohort nursing survey. Methods. Data were informed and groups defined by the self-reported minutes per day of moderate physical activity collected from a large international survey of practicing nurses ( n = 2264). Groups were: Group (G) 1 - high workplace (≥30 minutes/day)/high leisure (≥30 minutes/day), G2 - high workplace/low leisure (<30 minutes/day), G3 - low workplace/low leisure (<30 minutes/day) and G4 - low workplace/high leisure. Results. G2 had a high BMI and were younger than G4. G4 were significantly more active away from work and more likely to report cycling to work than G2. In contrast, G2 were most likely to have taken sick days because of their health (χ2 = 19·101), have difficulty sleeping most of the time and have a medical history of diagnosed anxiety and depression. Conclusions. This study shows that improved well-being can be achieved in nursing cohort through leisure-time physical activity. Relevance to clinical practice. This research shows that nurse should consider leisure-time physical activity necessary to maintain and prolong health and that workplace activity is not a sufficient stimulus. This has important implications for workforce planners and administrators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]