Premium
Psychometric testing of the revised “Families’ Importance in Nursing Care—Nurses’ Attitudes instrument”
Author(s) -
Mackie Benjamin R.,
Marshall Andrea,
Mitchell Marion,
Ireland Michael J.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of advanced nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.948
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1365-2648
pISSN - 0309-2402
DOI - 10.1111/jan.13442
Subject(s) - exploratory factor analysis , construct validity , likert scale , nursing , test (biology) , psychometrics , referral , medicine , acute care , survey instrument , scale (ratio) , psychology , family medicine , applied psychology , health care , clinical psychology , patient satisfaction , economics , biology , economic growth , developmental psychology , paleontology , physics , quantum mechanics
Background The validity of instruments is crucial in ensuring that data collected are sound and that these data represent what the instrument claims to measure. When an instrument is revised or used in a different population, it is useful to re‐examine its construct validity. Aim To test the psychometrics properties of an instrument—the revised Families’ Importance In Nursing Care—Nurses’ Attitudes, designed to measure nurse’ attitudes towards involving family in nursing care in an adult acute care setting. Design and methodology A cross‐sectional survey design was used in April–May 2016 with a sample of Enrolled and Registered Nurses ( N = 212) to test the factor structure of the revised Families’ Importance In Nursing‐Nurses’ Attitudes instrument. The instrument had 26 items with a five‐point Likert response scale. Principle components analysis and exploratory factor analysis were performed with oblique rotations to assess the internal structure of the instrument. Setting A regional referral hospital in Queensland, Australia. Results Using Principal Components Analysis and Principal Axis Factoring, we obtained the same factor structure to that originally identified for the instrument. Our results suggested the removal of six items to refine the instrument and achieve simple structure. Conclusion The removal of several items, relabeling of factors and residual cross‐loading issues suggest that further revisions to the instrument are needed.