标准预防措施问卷的汉化与信效度检验

doi:10.3761/j.issn.1672-9234.2023.12.013

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的对英文版标准预防措施问卷（Standard Precautions Questionnaire，SPQ）进行汉化，并检验中文版SPQ的信效度。方法获取问卷使用授权后，对英文版SPQ进行翻译，经专家咨询、预调查后，形成中文版SPQ。于2021年12月—2022年3月，采用便利抽样法，对来自四川省3所三级甲等综合医院的609名护士进行问卷调查，并从中便利抽取30名调查对象，于其初次接受调查2周后，再次对其进行调查，以收集重测信度评价资料。结果中文版SPQ共包含7个维度、24个条目；条目水平的内容效度指数为0.750~1.000，问卷水平的平均内容效度指数为0.916。探索性因子分析共提取7个公因子，7个公因子的累计方差贡献率为80.784%，各条目在所属公因子上的载荷为0.770~0.904，各条目的因子归属情况与其在源问卷中的因子归属情况一致。验证性因子分析结果提示，模型配适度指标较好[χ²/df=1.470，渐进残差均方和平方根（RMSEA）=0.039，拟合优度指数（GFI）=0.963，调整后适配度指数（AGFI）=0.940，比较适配指数（CFI）=0.985，增值拟合指数（IFI）=0.985，非归准适配指数（TLI）=0.980，基准化适配度指数（NFI）=0.956]。问卷的Cronbach’s α系数为0.894，各维度的Cronbach’s α系数为0.836~0.950；问卷的重测信度系数为0.989，各维度的重测信度系数为0.900~0.989（P<0.05）。结论中文版SPQ具有良好的信效度，可作为评估护士遵守标准预防措施影响因素的工具。

关键词: 标准预防, 问卷, 信度, 效度

Abstract:

Objective To translate the English version of the Standard Precautions Questionnaire（SPQ） into Chinese and analyze its reliability and validity. Methods After obtaining authorization to utilize the SPQ，the English version of the SPQ was translated and adapted culturally，and the Chinese version of the SPQ was formed after validity testing of the questionnaire content by experts，pretesting，and applicability evaluation. The Chinese version of the SPQ reliability and validity test was conducted from December 2021 to March 2022 using convenience sampling among a total of 609 clinical nursing staffs in three tertiary level A general hospitals in Sichuan Province. Results The Chinese version of the SPQ content validity index was 0.750-1.000 for each item level and 0.916 for the questionnaire. The exploratory factor analysis extracted a total of 7 factors，which were consistent with the original scale，and the cumulative variance contribution to the scale was 80.784%. The load value of each item on the common factor was 0.770-0.904. The Confirmatory factor analysis χ²/df=1.470，RMSEA=0.039，GFI=0.963，AGFI=0.940，CFI=0.985，IFI=0.985，TLI=0.980，NFI=0.956 with good model fit indicators. The Cronbach’s α of the total questionnaire was 0.894，and the Cronbach’s α of each dimension was distributed between 0.836-0.950. The test-retest reliablity coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.989. The intra-group correlation coefficient of the retest reliability of each dimension was well distributed between 0.900-0.989（P<0.05）. Conclusion The Chinese version of SPQ has good reliability and validity. It can be used as an assessment instrument for nurses’ compliance with standard precautions and impact factors.

Key words: Standard Precautions, Questionnaire, Reliability, Validity

黄艳芳, 郭声敏, 李翠, 夏娇, 孙鸿燕, 李雨昕. 标准预防措施问卷的汉化与信效度检验[J]. 中华护理教育, 2023, 20(12): 1481-1486.

HUANG Yanfang, GUO Shengmin, LI Cui, XIA Jiao, SUN Hongyan, LI Yuxin. Translation and psychometric properties evaluation of the Chinese version of Standard Precautions Questionnaire[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing Education, 2023, 20(12): 1481-1486.

图/表 1

参考文献 21

[1]	Lam SC. Validation and cross-cultural pilot testing of complia-nce with standard precautions scale:self-administered instru-ment for clinical nurses[J]. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 2014, 35(5):547-555. doi: 10.1086/675835
[2]	李六亿. 标准预防的介绍[J]. 中华医院管理杂志, 1999, 15(4):1.
	Li LY. Introduction to standard precautions[J]. Chin J Hosp Adm, 1999, 15(4):1.
[3]	蒋荣猛. 标准预防是医院感染控制的基石[J]. 毒理学杂志, 2020, 34(2):4.
	Jiang RM. Standard precautions are the cornerstone of hospital infection control[J]. J Toxicol, 2020, 34(2):4.
[4]	Helena O, Kanste OI, Hannu S. Hand-hygiene compliance by hos-pital staff and incidence of health-care-associated infections,Finland[J]. Bull World Health Organ, 2020, 98(7):475-483. doi: 10.2471/BLT.19.247494
[5]	Büchler AC, Dangel M, Frei R, et al. Does high adherence to contact precautions lead to low in-hospital transmission of multi-drug-resistant micro-organisms in the endemic setting?[J]. J Hosp Infect, 2021, 116:53-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.07.002 pmid: 34252477
[6]	Zhang S, Kong X, Lamb KV, et al. High nursing workload is a main associated factor of poor hand hygiene adherence in Beijing,China:an observational study[J]. Int J Nurs Pract, 2019, 25(2):e12720. doi: 10.1111/ijn.2019.25.issue-2
[7]	Powers D, Armellino D, Dolansky M, et al. Factors influencing nurse compliance with Standard Precautions[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2016, 44(1):4-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.10.001 pmid: 26769280
[8]	Pereira FMV, Lam SC, Chan JHM, et al. Difference in complia-nce with Standard Precautions by nursing staff in Brazil versus Hong Kong[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2015, 43(7):769-772. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.03.021
[9]	Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action:a social cognitive theory[M]. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1986:xiii,617.
[10]	Bottaro BB, Pereira FM, Reinato LA, et al. Adherence to standard precautions by nursing professionals:a literature review[J]. J Nurs Ufpe Online, 2016, 10(3):1137-1142.
[11]	李淑花, 商临萍, 袁丽荣, 等. 护理人员标准预防依从行为及影响因素自我报告评估工具的研究进展[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(12):1462-1467. doi: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.12.008
	Li SH, Shang LP, Yuan LR, et al. Research progress of self-report assessment tools for standard precautions compliance and influencing factors of nursing staff[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(12):1462-1467. doi: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.12.008
[12]	Michinov E, Buffet-Bataillon S, Chudy C, et al. Sociocognitive determinants of self-reported compliance with standard pre-cautions:development and preliminary testing of a ques-tionnaire with French health care workers[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2016, 44(1):14-19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.07.041 pmid: 26422181
[13]	Luna TDDC, Pereira-Ávila FMV, Brandão P, et al. Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Standard Precau-tions Questionnaire for health professionals in Brazil[J]. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, 2020, 73(s6):1-7.
[14]	World Health Organization. Process of translation and adap-tation of instruments[EB/OL]. 2018-04-23)[2022-03-28]. http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/.
[15]	Memon MA, Ting H, Cheah J, et al. Sample size for survey research:review and recommendations[J]. Struct Equ Model, 2020, 4(2):1-20. doi: 10.1080/10705519709540056
[16]	Hajjar ST. Statistical analysis:internal-consistency reliability and construct validity[J]. Int J Qual Methods, 2018, 6(1):46-57.
[17]	Mehta S, Bastero-Caballero RF, Sun Y, et al. Performance of intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC) as a reliability index under various distributions in scale reliability studies[J]. Stat Med, 2018, 37(18):2734-2752. doi: 10.1002/sim.v37.18
[18]	Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity:new developments in creating objective measuring instruments[J]. Psychol Assess, 2019, 31(12):1412-1427. doi: 10.1037/pas0000626 pmid: 30896212
[19]	Chen FF. What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research[J]. J Pers Soc Psychol, 2008, 95(5):1005. doi: 10.1037/a0013193 pmid: 18954190
[20]	Han DL, Seo KS, Kim ES, et al. Influences of moral sensitivity and safety environment on compliance with standard precau-tions among nurses[J]. Journal of the Korea Academia-Indus-trial Cooperation Society, 2018, 19(3):364-375.
[21]	Quan M, Wang X, Wu H, et al. Influencing factors on use of standard precautions against occupational exposures to blood and body fluids among nurses in China[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015, 8(12):22450-22459. pmid: 26885227