Open AccessDeveloping an instrument to self‐evaluate the Discharge Planning of Ward Nurses
Author(s) -
Sakai Shima,
YamamotoMitani Noriko,
Takai Yukari,
Fukahori Hiroki,
Ogata Yasuko
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
nursing open
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.55
H-Index - 12
ISSN - 2054-1058
DOI - 10.1002/nop2.31
Subject(s) - discharge planning , exploratory factor analysis , confirmatory factor analysis , reliability (semiconductor) , construct validity , psychology , test (biology) , concurrent validity , nursing , acute care , construct (python library) , internal consistency , psychometrics , applied psychology , structural equation modeling , medicine , clinical psychology , health care , computer science , paleontology , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , machine learning , economics , biology , programming language , economic growth
Aims To develop the Discharge Planning of Ward Nurses (DPWN), a Japanese self‐evaluation instrument for ward nurses' discharge planning practices. Design Cross‐sectional survey. Methods Participants were 624 ward nurses from six hospitals in Japan with a discharge planning department. Items about discharge planning practices were collected from literature and interviews with nurses and researchers. Construct validity, concurrent validity, internal consistency and test–retest reliability were tested. Results Initially, 55 items were collected. Examination of the floor effect, item‐total, good–poor analyses and exploratory factor analysis yielded a four‐factor model with 24 items (‘teaching home‐care skills with community/hospital professionals,’ ‘identifying clients’ potential needs early in the discharge process,’ ‘introducing social resources’ and ‘identifying client/family wishes and building consensus for discharge’). The four‐factor structure was supported by confirmatory factor analysis. The DPWN correlated with scales ascertaining similar concepts, supporting concurrent validity. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability were generally satisfactory.