Back to Search
Start Over
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the revised surveys on patient safety culture™ (SOPS®) hospital survey 2.0.
- Source :
- BMC Nursing; 12/26/2022, Vol. 21 Issue 1, p1-13, 13p, 1 Diagram, 6 Charts
- Publication Year :
- 2022
-
Abstract
- Background: Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Hospital Survey (HSOPS 1.0), developed by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in 2004, has been widely adopted in the United States and internationally. An updated version, the SOPS Hospital Survey 2.0 (HSOPS 2.0), released in 2019, has not yet been applied in China. The aim of the present study was to translate HSOPS 2.0 into Chinese version with cross-cultural adaptations and test its psychometric properties. Methods: A convenience sample was used. Hospital nurses (N = 1013) and a sub-set (n = 200) was invited for the re-test. A three-stage study was conducted. Firstly, the HSOPS 2.0 was translated by a panel. Secondly, the content validity was tested using the two-round Delphi method and cognitive interview. Next, the construct validity was tested by the confirmatory factor analysis and further demonstrated by the convergent validity, discriminant validity, and correlations with the outcome of patient safety. Thirdly, the reliability was tested by internal consistency reliability and re-test reliability. Results: The "float or PRN" and "manager" words were deleted as considered unfitted for the Chinese health care system. The content validity index provided evidence of strong content validity (I-CVI = 0.84 ~ 1.00, S-CVI = 0.98). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good model fit (χ<superscript>2</superscript>/df = 4.05, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.94) and acceptable factor loadings (0.41 ~ 0.97). Convergent validity, and discriminant validity supported the factorial structure of the Chinese version of HSOPS 2.0. Further evidence for the construct validity was derived from correlations with the outcome of patient safety (r = 0.10 ~ 0.41). A good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.68 ~ 0.93, McDonald's omega = 0.84 ~ 0.96) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.78 ~ 0.95) showed acceptable reliability. Additionally, Chinese nurses reported markedly lower scores for three dimensions, including "Response to Error", "Communication Openness", and "Reporting Patient Safety Events", when comparing the findings of this study with those from U.S. research utilizing the HSOPS 2.0. Conclusion: The Chinese version of HSOPS 2.0 demonstrated good validity and reliability in a Chinese sample of hospital nurses, which suggests that it can be used to measure nurse-perceived patient safety culture in future research and practice. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of HSOPS 2.0 among other Chinese healthcare professionals remain to be confirmed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Subjects :
- MEDICAL quality control
TEAMS in the workplace
NURSES' attitudes
RESEARCH evaluation
STATISTICAL reliability
NURSING
RESEARCH methodology evaluation
RESEARCH methodology
DISCRIMINANT analysis
TERTIARY care
LEADERS
PSYCHOMETRICS
MULTITRAIT multimethod techniques
CRONBACH'S alpha
QUESTIONNAIRES
HOSPITAL nursing staff
FACTOR analysis
DESCRIPTIVE statistics
CHI-squared test
INTRACLASS correlation
NURSES
RESEARCH funding
STATISTICAL sampling
PATIENT safety
CORPORATE culture
DELPHI method
NURSE-patient ratio
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 14726955
- Volume :
- 21
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- Complementary Index
- Journal :
- BMC Nursing
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 160988558
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-01142-3