Premium
Nurses’ perception of the use of computerised information systems in practice: questionnaire development
Author(s) -
Oroviogoicoechea Cristina,
Watson Roger,
Beortegui Elena,
Remirez Silvia
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of clinical nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.94
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1365-2702
pISSN - 0962-1067
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03003.x
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , reliability (semiconductor) , usability , construct validity , test (biology) , psychology , face validity , variance (accounting) , applied psychology , nursing , psychometrics , medicine , clinical psychology , computer science , paleontology , power (physics) , physics , accounting , quantum mechanics , human–computer interaction , business , biology
Aim. To develop and validate a questionnaire to explore the perceptions of nurses about the implementation of a computerised information system in clinical practice. Background. A growing interest in understanding nurses’ experience of developing and implementing clinically relevant Information Technology systems and the lack of measurement tools in this area, justifies further research into the development of instruments to provide an insight into nurses’ experience. Design. Survey and questionnaire development. Method. An initial draft of the questionnaire was developed based on the literature and expert opinion. The questionnaire was piloted by ten nurses to check face validity, reliability and test‐retest reliability. A revised version of the questionnaire was distributed to nurses working in the in‐patient area of a university hospital in Spain ( n = 227). Principal components analysis with oblique rotation was carried out to test theoretically developed underlying dimensions and to test construct validity. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to determine internal consistency. Results. Cronbach’s alpha for all the items included in the different scales was 0·88 in the pilot questionnaire and test‐retest reliability was adequate. Principal components analysis of items related to mechanisms produced a three‐component structure (‘IT support’, ‘usability’ and ‘information characteristics’). The three factors explained 48·6% of the total variance and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0·66–0·79. Principal components analysis of items related to outcomes produced a three factor solution (‘impact on patient care’, ‘impact on communication’ and ‘image profile’). The factors explained 65·9% of the total variance and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0·64–0·85. Conclusion. The study provides a detailed description and justification of an instrument development process. The instrument is valid and reliable for the setting where it has been used. Relevance to clinical practice. The instrument could provide insight into nurses’ experience of IT implementation that will guide further development of systems to enhance clinical practice.