Search

Objective: This study explored the factors influencing commissioned welfare volunteers' (CWVs) attitudes toward mental illnesses and how their attitudes correlated with their social distance from people with mental illness. Materials and Methods: Data from 223 CWVs were analyzed statistically. Factor extractions for the Image for Mental Illness Scale (IMI) and Social Distance Scale (SDS) were calculated. We examined the relations between factors in IMI and SDS. Results: CWVs' attitudes were classified as Understanding (understanding of the condition), Secure (feelings of safety in the presence of those with mental illness), and Activity (reactions to the behaviors of people with mental illness). Social distance from those with mental illness was classified as Public and Private Interactions. CWVs' interactions with people with mental illness were significantly influenced by feeling Secure in the presence of the latter. Low Public and Private Interactions were influenced by older age. CWVs' "experience in providing consultations for mental illness" led to the avoidance of Private Interactions. Conclusion: CWVs should feel safe when involved in Public or Private Interactions with individuals with mental illness. CWVs reported a preference for a higher level of social distance from people with mental illness.

ObjectivesTo develop the Psychiatric Nurse Self-Efficacy Scales, and to examine their reliability and validity.DesignWe developed the Improved Self-Efficacy Scale (ISES) and Decreased Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) using existing evidence. Statistical analysis was conducted on the data to test reliability and validity.SettingThe study’s setting was psychiatric facilities in three prefectures in Japan.ParticipantsData from 514 valid responses were extracted of the 786 responses by psychiatric nurses.Outcome measuresThe study measured the reliability and validity of the scales.ResultsThe ISES has two factors (‘Positive changes in the patient’ and ‘Prospect of continuing in psychiatric nursing’) and the DSES has three (‘Devaluation of own role as a psychiatric nurse’, ‘Decrease in nursing ability due to overload’ and ‘Difficulty in seeing any results in psychiatric nursing’). With regard to scale reliability, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.634–0.845. With regard to scale validity, as the factorial validity of the ISES and DSES, for the ISES, χ2/df (110.625/37) ratio=2.990 (p2/df (101.982/37) ratio=2.756 (pStatistical analyses showed the scales to be reliable and valid measures.ConclusionsThe ISES and DSES can accurately assess psychiatric nurses’ self-efficacy. Using these scales, it is possible to formulate programmes for improving psychiatric nurses’ feelings of self-efficacy.

The average length of hospital stay in the psychiatric ward is longer, and the risk of patient-to-nurse violence is higher than that in other departments. Therefore, psychiatric nurses’ work environment may differ from that of other nurses. The factors related to psychiatric nurses’ self-efficacy may also differ from those of general workers or other nurses. Mental health care that considers the characteristics of psychiatric nurses requires exploration of self-efficacy unique to psychiatric nurses. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the distinct factors related to psychiatric nurses’ self-efficacy. The developed 24 items related to improvement in self-efficacy and 25 items related to decrease in self-efficacy were examined. The Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale was used to measure the validity of the factors. To extract the factors of self-efficacy, data from 132 nurses and assistant nurses who provided informed consent were analyzed, and the reliability and validity of the factors were calculated. The factors associated with improvement in self-efficacy were “Positive reactions by patients,” “Ability to positively change nurse-patient relationship,” and “Practicability of appropriate nursing.” The factors associated with decrease in self-efficacy were “Uncertainty in psychiatric nursing” and “Nurses’ role loss.” The Cronbach’s α for all factors exceeded .70. Of the five factors, four had significant weak-to-moderate correlations with the Japanese version of the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale; therefore, the validity was quantitatively confirmed with four factors. Interventions based on these four factors may improve psychiatric nurses’ self-efficacy. Additionally, it is possible that this tool assesses the unique facets of self-efficacy rather than psychiatric nurses’ general self-efficacy. Interventions to improve psychiatric nurses’ self-efficacy based on the characteristics of psychiatry are needed.

This study examined the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation–Outcome Measure (CORE-OM), a standardized, brief, but comprehensive outcome measurement. The target population consisted of 1684 Japanese company employees, hospital staff, and university students. A confirmatory factor analysis proved that our data fit the factor structure of the original CORE-OM. We also examined its internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and sensitivity in discriminating between clinical and nonclinical samples. After demonstrating these results, we discuss how the Japanese version of the CORE-OM can be used both in clinical and research settings. © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.