Search

Background: Consideration needs to be given to a variety of factors that influence the implementation of evidence-based nursing practice (EBNP). Aim: This study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire that measures registered nurses' competencies, beliefs, facilitators, barriers, and implementation of EBNP. Methods: Methodological cross-sectional study in which 612 registered nurses were selected by convenient sampling. A panel of six experts evaluated the content validity of the first draft of the EBP-CBFRI questionnaire. The final questionnaire was made up of 55 items. Reliability was determined by means of internal consistency. Construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity was assessed. Results: The questionnaire has proven acceptable reliability and validity when used with registered nurses. The scale-level content validity index was.92. Cronbach's α coefficient for the total questionnaire was.87. Exploratory factor analysis supported five significant factors that explained 64.8% of the variance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Nipple shield use is common among breastfeeding mothers, yet no instrument measures maternal satisfaction. The new Maternal Nipple Shield Satisfaction Scale (MNSSS) was evaluated for reliability and validity. Methods: The MNSSS for was tested in two phases: women (N = 128) using nipple shields in the previous 6 months and the second, women, (N = 57) within the first 3 weeks postpartum. Results: From the original 21-item scale, content validity analysis, Cronbach's alpha, item to total correlation testing, exploratory factor analysis resulted in a one factor scale consisting of nine items with a Cronbach's alpha of.90. Convergent validity testing resulted in a small, but significant negative correlation. Conclusion: The MNSSS may be a useful instrument for examining satisfaction of women using nipple shields for breastfeeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Most patient safety studies focus on errors of commission rather than on errors of omission. No tools measure errors of omission in primary care. We developed the Errors of Care Omission Survey (ECOS) and present its cognitive and psychometric testing. Methods: Twenty-six primary care providers (PCPs) participated in cognitive interviews, which were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed. ECOS was also pilot tested with 37 PCPs. Item analysis and reliability testing w conducted. Results: Interviewees agreed that ECOS measures errors of omission and items were clear. The response categories were revised. All items were correlated and subscales had high internal consistency reliability. Conclusions: ECOS can measure errors of omission in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: This study was done to develop and psychometrically test the Collaboration in the Clinical Learning Environment (CCLE) tool. The researcher acknowledged 2 distinct populations that required input into this particular tool development: staff nurses and nursing faculty members. Both have influence into student learning. Methods: Research followed the 8-step methodology for tool development as defined by DeVellis. Results: Reliability testing was done on the 24-item CCLE, which confirmed a Cronbach's alpha of .96. Exploratory factor analysis with principal component factor analysis was done to examine the structure of the instrument. Validity was supported through the content expert review, along with concurrent validity. Conclusions: Although collaboration has been emphasized for many years in the clinical learning environment, the construct has never been successfully operationalized. Implications for nursing education, practice, and theory are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Three aims were addressed: (a) Evaluate properties of the items comprising the Life Changes in Epilepsy Scale-Pilot (LCES-P), (b) use item analysis to optimize the scale, (c) evaluate construct and criterion-related validity of the optimized LCES. Methods: The LCES-P was administered to 174 adults with epilepsy. Item analysis and exploratory factor analysis were performed. Internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and criterion-related validity were evaluated. Results: 17 items were retained in the optimized LCES. Internal consistency reliability was supported. Path analysis was used to evaluate construct validity. Criterion-related validity was supported by correlations with the Medical Outcomes SF-36 Survey (SF-36) General Health subscale and a criterion variable. Conclusions: The optimized version of the LCES can serve as a valuable outcome measure in clinical and research environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Provider co-management has emerged in practice to alleviate demands of larger, more complex patient panels, yet no tools exist to measure nurse practitioner (NP)-physician co-management. The purpose of this study is to develop a tool that measures NP-physician co-management., Methods: Items were generated based on three theoretical dimensions of co-management. Face and content validity were established with six experts. Pilot testing was conducted with a convenience sample of 40 NPs and physicians. We computed mean, standard deviation, skewness, interitem and corrected item-total correlations, and Cronbach's alpha., Results: Psychometric analysis yielded high subscale reliability: effective communication (α = .811); mutual respect and trust (α = .746); and shared philosophy of care (α = .779)., Conclusions: PCMI demonstrates strong internal reliability consistency. Future research to examine construct validity is recommended., (© 2018 Springer Publishing Company, LLC.)