Premium
The Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale: Scale development and validation study
Author(s) -
Baele Céline A.,
Fontaine Johnny R. J.
Publication year - 2021
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.14923
Subject(s) - psychology , distress , confirmatory factor analysis , scale (ratio) , burnout , context (archaeology) , clinical psychology , job satisfaction , social psychology , applied psychology , structural equation modeling , paleontology , statistics , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics , biology
Aims Moral distress—arising when one is constrained from moral action—has been receiving increased attention in nursing research. The phenomenon is associated with negative outcomes and is shown to impact a broad range of healthcare professions. The context‐specific nature of existing measures, however, makes it difficult, if not impossible, to compare the prevalence and impact of moral distress across nursing settings and healthcare professions. This study presents an appraisal approach to the assessment of moral distress. The aims of this study were to develop and to investigate the reliability and validity of the Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale as a context‐independent assessment instrument for moral distress. Design This is a cross‐sectional correlational validation study. Methods Between September 2018 and June 2019, a total of 406 healthcare employees (mainly nurses) completed a quantitative survey consisting of a standard moral distress measure (Moral Distress Scale‐Revised) and the Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale. A subsample ( n = 164) received extra questions on work characteristics, well‐being and attitudinal outcomes. Confirmatory factor analysis, Pearson correlations and regression analyses were conducted in order to evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed scale. Results Confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence for the predicted structure of the 8‐item Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale. As expected, the scale is positively correlated with the Moral Distress Scale‐Revised and with job demands, burnout, depressive symptoms, and turnover intentions and negatively with job resources and job satisfaction. Furthermore, the scale showed incremental validity in predicting wellbeing and attitudinal outcomes above and beyond both known predictive work characteristics and the Moral Distress Scale‐Revised. Conclusion This study provides first empirical evidence for the reliability and validity of the Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale. Impact The Moral Distress‐Appraisal Scale can be used across healthcare professions and contexts. The proposed appraisal approach may facilitate integration of the scale into occupational health research and practice.