:: دوره 31، شماره 4 - ( زمستان 1400 ) ::
جلد 31 شماره 4 صفحات 458-450 برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها
روان‌سنجی ابزار خودکارآمدی سونداژ متناوب تمیز ادراری در بیماران مبتلا به مثانه عصبی بستری در بیمارستان‌های توانبخشی منطقه یک شهر تهران سال 1398
افسانه مستقیم احمدآبادی1 ، فایزه صحبایی روی 2، شیرین حجازی1
1- گروه پرستاری، دانشکده پرستاری و مامایی، علوم پزشکی تهران، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2- گروه پرستاری، دانشکده پرستاری و مامایی، علوم پزشکی تهران، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران ، fsahbaei@sbmu.ac.ir
چکیده:   (1571 مشاهده)
سابقه و هدف: بروز مثانه عصبی در حال افزایش است و این افراد به سونداژ نیاز دارند. سونداژ متناوب تمیز ادراری روشی کم خطر برای بیماران است.  
روش بررسی: این مطالعه، پژوهش توصیفی از نوع روش شناختی و اعتبارسنجی بود. برای روایی محتوا 10 نفر به روش هدفمند، برای روایی صوری 25 نفربه روش آسان و برای روایی سازه به روش تدریجی از مجریان سونداژ انتخاب شدند. جهت پایایی ابزار، پرسشنامه توسط 10 نفر تکمیل شد.   
یافته­ها: ابتدا پیش نویس تدوین و از دو روش کیفی و کمی برای روایی صوری استفاده شد. نمرات تأثیر گویه­ها کمتر از 5/1 نبودند. بر اساس جدول لاوشه هیچیک از گویه­های کمتر از 62% حذف نشدند. در روایی سازه، از روش تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی و چرخش واریماکس استفاده شد و کفایت حجم نمونه، با آزمون KMO 78/0 بود و نتایج آزمون کرویت بارتلت معنی­دار بود (486/4017، 001/0>p). 5 گویه با اشتراک کمتر از 4/0 حذف و تحلیل عاملی دوباره انجام شد و تعداد عوامل به چهار عدد با واریانس 136/40 رسید. نتایج همسانی درونی ضریب آلفای کرونباخ کل پرسشنامه با 32 گویه برای زنان معادل 862/0 و برای مردان 859/0 بود. نتایج ثبات عامل­های ابزار تأیید شد و نتیجه آزمون ICC (949/0) ضریب همبستگی مناسبی را در خصوص هر سازه نشان داد.
نتیجه­گیری: ابزار طراحی شده در این مطالعه روا و پایا است و می­تواند در مطالعات مختلف مورد استفاده قرار گیرد..
واژه‌های کلیدی: روان سنجی، ابزار خودکارآمدی سونداژ متناوب تمیز ادراری، بیماران مبتلا به مثانه عصبی
متن کامل [PDF 342 kb]   (586 دریافت)    
نيمه آزمايشي : تحليلي/مقطعي/توصيفي | موضوع مقاله: پرستاري
دریافت: 1399/12/6 | پذیرش: 1400/7/14
فهرست منابع
1. Panicker, J. N. Fowler,CJ. Kessler,TM., et al . "Lower urinary tract dysfunction in the neurological patient: clinical assessment and management." The Lancet Neurology.2015;14(7): 720-732. [DOI:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00070-8]
2. Dorsher, P. T.McIntosh, P. M . "Neurogenic bladder." Adv Urol 2012: 816274. [DOI:10.1155/2012/816274]
3. Weber, DJ. Sickbert,B. Gould, C. V. Incidence of catheter-associated and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infections in a healthcare system.Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.2011;32(8),822-823. [DOI:10.1086/661107]
4. Geng V, Cobussen-Boekhorst H, Farrell M, Gea-Sánchez I, Pearce T, Schwennesen S, et al. Catheterisation: indwelling catheters in adults . Arnhem (NL): European Association of Urology Nurses; 2018.
5. Mahajan ST, Frasure HE, Marrie RA. The prevalence of urinary catheterization in women and men with multiple sclerosis. J Spinal Cord Med. 2013;36(6):632-7. [DOI:10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000084]
6. Przydacz, M. Denys,p. corcos,J . "What do we know about neurogenic bladder prevalence and management in developing countries and emerging regions of the world?" Annals of physical and rehabilitation medicine.2017 ;60(5): 341-346. [DOI:10.1016/j.rehab.2017.02.008]
7. Feneley, R. C.Hopley, I. B. Wells, P. N. et al . "Urinary catheters: history, current status, adverse events and research agenda." J Med Eng Techno.2015;l39(8): 459-470. [DOI:10.3109/03091902.2015.1085600]
8. Centers for Disease Control Prevention . Urinary tract infection (catheter-associated urinary tract infection and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infection and other urinary system infection events.2015.
9. Rezai, M.S. Bagheri ,N.M. Nikkhah, A. Catheter-related urinary nosocomial infections in intensive care units: An epidemiologic study in North of IranCaspian journal of internal medicine.2017;8(2):76.
10. Ginsberg D, Gousse A, Keppenne V, et al. Phase 3 efficacy and tolerability study of onabotulinumtoxinA for urinary incontinence from neurogenic detrusor overactivity. J Urol. 2012;187:2131-2139. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.125]
11. Vahr S, Cobussen-Boekhorst H, Eikenboom J, Geng V, Holroyd S, Lester M, et al. Catheterisation: urethral intermittent in adults . Arnhem (NL): European Association of Urology Nurses; 2013. http://patients.uroweb.org .
12. Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Health data branch web portal: Ontario case costing. Toronto (ON): Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2018.
13. Bermingham SL, Hodgkinson S, Wright S, et al. Intermittent self catheterisation with hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated catheters: a systematic review and cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:e8639. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.e8639]
14. Skelly J, Eyles P, Hilts L, Worral J, Campbell L, North J. Intermittent self-catheterization: a guide for men and women [Internet]. Hamilton: Canadian Nurse Continence Advisors; c1986-2016.
15. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115-135. [DOI:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8]
16. Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J.(2015) Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. USA: Oxford University Press. [DOI:10.1093/med/9780199685219.001.0001]
17. Mohammadbeigi, A. Mohammadsalehi, N. Aligol, M.(2015)Validity and Reliability of the Instruments and Types of MeasurmentS in Health Applied Researches. Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences ;13:1153-1170.
18. Baghernejad Hamzekolayee, Qamar. Sahbaeiroy,Faezeh. Zare, Mohammad (2018)
19. Design and Psychometric of Smoking Cessation Instrument according to Precaution Adoption Process Model in Patients Hospitalized in Hospitals Affiliated to Medical University of Babol, Iran, during 2017. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutics • Jan-Mar 2018 (Suppl) • 12 (1) | S356- S363.
20. Diem KG. A(2016) step-by-step guide to developing effective questionnaires and survey procedures for program evaluation & research. Rutgers Cooperative Research & Extension, NJAES, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Retrieved from University of Canberra E-reserve 2004 Available from:www.rce.rutgers.edu/evaluation
21. Sahbaeiroy , Faezeh . Ramezankhani, Ali. Alhani ,Fatemeh(2016) Explanation of Pharmaceutical Care of Cardiovascular Patients Hospitalized
22. in Hospitals Affiliated with Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. Int. J. Pharm. Res. Allied Sci., 2016, 5(3):277-283.
23. Speyer R, Cordier R, Kertscher B, Heijnen BJ.(2014) Psychometric properties of questionnaires on functional health status in oropharyngeal dysphagia: a systematic literature review. BioMed Research International . http://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/458678/a. [DOI:10.1155/2014/458678]
24. Pournorooz, Neda. Sahbaeiroy,Faezeh. Zare, Mohammad (2018)
25. EFFECTS OF SELF-CARE TRAINING ON MS PATIENTS' HOPE RATE BY GROUP DISCUSSION. Pharmacophore, 8(5) 2017, Pages 65-69.
26. Dolatyaree A, Sharififar S, Zareian A, Tadrisi SD.(2015) Translation and validation of family satisfaction questionnaire of adult patients hospitalized in Intensive Care Units. Journal of Critical Care Nursing ;8:59-68.
27. Panicker JN, Fowler CJ, Kessler TM. Lower urinary tract dysfunction in the neurological patient: clinical assessment and management. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:720-32. [DOI:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00070-8]
28. Dorsher PT, McIntosh PM. Neurogenic bladder. Adv Urol 2012;2012: 816274. [DOI:10.1155/2012/816274]
29. Weber DJ, Sickbert-Bennett EE, Gould CV, Brown VM, Huslage K, Rutala WA. Incidence of catheter-associated and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infections in a healthcare system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:822-3. [DOI:10.1086/661107]
30. Geng V, Cobussen-Boekhorst H, Farrell M, Gea-Sánchez I, Pearce T, Schwennesen S, et al, Editors. Evidence-based Guidelines for Best Practice in Urological Health Care. Catheterisation: indwelling catheters in adults. Arnhem (NL): European Association of Urology Nurses; 2018.
31. Mahajan ST, Frasure HE, Marrie RA. The prevalence of urinary catheterization in women and men with multiple sclerosis. J Spinal Cord Med 2013;36:632-7. [DOI:10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000084]
32. Przydacz M, Denys P, Corcos J. What do we know about neurogenic bladder prevalence and management in developing countries and emerging regions of the world? Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2017 ;60:341-346. [DOI:10.1016/j.rehab.2017.02.008]
33. Feneley RC, Hopley IB, Wells PN. Urinary catheters: history, current status, adverse events and research agenda. J Med Eng Technol 2015;39:459-70. [DOI:10.3109/03091902.2015.1085600]
34. Centers for Disease Control Prevention. Urinary tract infection (catheter-associated urinary tract infection and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infection and other urinary system infection) events. Atlanta, GA: CDC; 2015.
35. Rezai MS, Bagheri-Nesami M, Nikkhah A. Catheter-related urinary nosocomial infections in intensive care units: An epidemiologic study in North of Iran. Caspian J Intern Med 2017;8:76-82.
36. Ginsberg D, Gousse A, Keppenne V, Sievert KD, Thompson C, Lam W, et al. Phase 3 efficacy and tolerability study of onabotulinumtoxinA for urinary incontinence from neurogenic detrusor overactivity. J Urol 2012;187:2131-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.125]
37. Vahr S, Cobussen-Boekhorst H, Eikenboom J, Geng V, Holroyd S, Lester M, et al. Catheterisation: urethral intermittent in adults. Arnhem (NL): European Association of Urology Nurses; 2013.
38. Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Health data branch web portal: Ontario case costing. Toronto (ON): Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2018.
39. Bermingham SL, Hodgkinson S, Wright S, Hayter E, Spinks J, Pellowe C. Intermittent self catheterisation with hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated catheters: a systematic review and cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2013; 346: e8639. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.e8639]
40. Skelly J, Eyles P, Hilts L, Worral J, Campbell L, North J. Intermittent self-catheterization: a guide for men and women [Internet]. Hamilton: Canadian Nurse Continence Advisors; c1986-2016.
41. Henseler J, Ringle C.M, Sarstedt M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci 2015;43:115-35. [DOI:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8]
42. Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Bouter LM, Vet HC, Terwee CB. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Braz J Phys Ther 2016;20:105-113. [DOI:10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0143]
43. Llewellyn, Ellardus. Van, Zyl. Rothmann, Sebastiaan. Positive Psychological Intervention Design and Protocols for Multi-Cultural Contexts. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2018.
44. Bonett DG, Wright TA. Cronbach's alpha reliability: Interval estimation, hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. J Organiz Behav 2015;36:3-15. [DOI:10.1002/job.1960]
45. Allame Z, Heydarinasab L, Fasanghari M, Shahmohammadi M. Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the Multidimensional Orientation Toward Dying and Death Inventory Among Students. Pract Clin Psychol 2018; 7: 291-302. [DOI:10.32598/jpcp.7.4.291]
46. Zyl LEV, Efendic E, Rothmann S, Shankland R. Best-practice guidelines for positive psychological intervention research design. Cham, Switzerland; Springer Nature Switzerland AG; 2019.
47. Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol Serv Saude 2017;26:649-59. [DOI:10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022]
48. Heale R, Twycross A, Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evid Based Nurs 2015;18:66-7. [DOI:10.1136/eb-2015-102129]
49. Streiner D L, Norman G R, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. USA: Oxford University Press; 2015. [DOI:10.1093/med/9780199685219.001.0001]
50. Vakili MM, Jahangiri N. Content Validity and Reliability of the Measurement Tools in Educational, Behavioral, and Health Sciences Research. J Med Educ Dev 2018; 10:105-117. [DOI:10.29252/edcj.10.28.106]
51. Mohammadbeigi A, Mohammadsalehi N, Aligol M. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments and Types of MeasurmentS in Health Applied Researches. Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences (JRUMS). 2015;13:1153-1170. [In Persian]
52. Diem KG. A step-by-step guide to developing effective questionnaires and survey procedures for program evaluation & research. Rutgers Cooperative Research & Extension, NJAES, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Retrieved from University of Canberra E-reserve 2016. Available from:www.rce.rutgers.edu/evaluation. http://orsp.rutgers.edu/humans1.html.
53. Sahbaeiroy F, Ramezankhani A, Alhani F. Explanation of Pharmaceutical Care of Cardiovascular Patients Hospitalized in Hospitals Affiliated with Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. Int J Pharm Res Allied Sci 2016, 5:277-283.
54. Speyer R, Cordier R, Kertscher B, Heijnen BJ. Psychometric properties of questionnaires on functional health status in oropharyngeal dysphagia: a systematic literature review. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:458678. [DOI:10.1155/2014/458678]
55. Moon S, Kim DH, Kim EJ, Kim YJ, Lee S. Evaluation of the validity and reliability of the Korean version of the Nursing Professional Values Scale-Revised. Nurse Educ Today 2014;34:325-30. [DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.014]
56. Demetrovics Z, Kiraly O, Koronczai B, Griffiths MD, Nagygyorgy K, Elekes Z, et al. Psychometric properties of the problematic internet use questionnaire Short-Form (PIUQ-SF-6) in a nationally representative sample of adolescents. PLoS ONE 2016: 11: e0159409. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0159409]



XML   English Abstract   Print



بازنشر اطلاعات
Creative Commons License این مقاله تحت شرایط Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License قابل بازنشر است.
دوره 31، شماره 4 - ( زمستان 1400 ) برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها