Development and psychometric property testing of a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) in 37 countries

Van Tiggelen, Hanne, Alves, Paulo, Ayello, Elizabeth, Baath, Carina, Baranoski, Sharon, Campbell, Karen, Dunk, Ann Marie, Gloeckner, Mary, Hevia, Heidi, Holloway, Samantha, Idensohn, Patricia, Karadağ, Ayişe, Langemo, Diane, LeBlanc, Kimberly, , Pokorná, Andrea, Romanelli, Marco, Santos, Vera Lucia Conceição de Gouveia, Smet, Steven, Williams, Ann, Woo, Kevin, Van Hecke, Ann, Verhaeghe, Sofie, & Beeckman, Dimitri (2021) Development and psychometric property testing of a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) in 37 countries. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(3), pp. 1609-1623.

View at publisher

Description

<p>Aim: To develop and psychometrically evaluate a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES). Design: Prospective psychometric instrument validation study. Method: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument was developed based on a literature review and expert input (N = 19). Face and content validity were assessed in a two-round Delphi procedure by 10 international experts affiliated with the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP). The instrument was psychometrically tested in a convenience sample of 387 nurses in 37 countries (April–May 2020). Validity of the multiple-choice test items (item difficulty, discriminating index, quality of the response alternatives), construct validity, and test–retest reliability (stability) were analysed and evaluated in light of international reference standards. Results: A 20-item instrument, covering six knowledge domains most relevant to skin tears, was designed. Content validity was established (CVI = 0.90–1.00). Item difficulty varied between 0.24 and 0.94 and the quality of the response alternatives between 0.01–0.52. The discriminating index was acceptable (0.19–0.77). Participants with a theoretically expected higher knowledge level had a significantly higher total score than participants with theoretically expected lower knowledge (p <.001). The 1-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.78–0.86) for the full instrument and varied between 0.72 (95% CI = 0.64–0.79) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.81–0.89) for the domains. Cohen's Kappa coefficients of the individual items ranged between 0.21 and 0.74. Conclusion: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument is supported by acceptable psychometric properties and can be applied in nursing education, research, and practice to assess knowledge of healthcare professionals about skin tears. Impact: Prevention and treatment of skin tears are a challenge for healthcare professionals. The provision of adequate care is based on profound and up-to-date knowledge. None of the existing instruments to assess skin tear knowledge is psychometrically tested, nor up-to-date. OASES can be used worldwide to identify education, practice, and research needs and priorities related to skin tears in clinical practice.</p>

Impact and interest:

6 citations in Scopus
4 citations in Web of Science®
Search Google Scholar™

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

ID Code: 230902
Item Type: Contribution to Journal (Journal Article)
Refereed: Yes
Measurements or Duration: 15 pages
Keywords: instrument development, knowledge, nursing, psychometrics, reliability, skin tear, validity
DOI: 10.1111/jan.14713
ISSN: 0309-2402
Pure ID: 110131778
Divisions: Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health
Current > Schools > School of Nursing
Copyright Owner: 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Copyright Statement: This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the document is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au
Deposited On: 18 May 2022 01:38
Last Modified: 03 Aug 2024 10:58