Development and preliminary evaluation of the validity and reliability of a revised illness perception questionnaire for healthcare professionals

被引：13

作者：

Arat S. ^{[1
]}

Van den Zegel A. ^{[2
]}

Van Rillaer M. ^{[3
]}

Moons P. ^{[4
,5
]}

Vandenberghe J. ^{[6
,7
]}

De Langhe E. ^{[1
,8
]}

Westhovens R. ^{[1
,8
]}

机构：

[1] KU Leuven, Department of Development and Regeneration, Skeletal Biology and Engineering Research Centre, Herestraat 49, Leuven

[2] Ursulinen High School, Hoogstraat 35, Mechelen

[3] Midwifery Practice Leuven, Diestsesteenweg 49, Leuven

[4] KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Kapucijnenvoer 35, Box 7001, Leuven

[5] University of Gothenburg, Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Gothenburg

[6] University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Psychiatry, Liaisonpsychiatry, Herestraat 49, Leuven

[7] KU Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Herestraat 49, Leuven

[8] University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Rheumatology, Herestraat 49, Leuven

来源：

BMC Nursing | / 15卷 / 1期

关键词：

Healthcare professionals; Illness perceptions; IPQ-R HP; Physical disease; Reliability; Validity;

D O I：

10.1186/s12912-016-0156-4

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: Diverging perceptions between individual patients with somatic diseases and their healthcare professionals might cause problems in communication and decision-making. To date, no measurement tool is available to compare the illness perceptions between these two groups. The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) is a validated, widely used instrument in many patient populations with somatic conditions. The aim of this study was to adapt the IPQ-R to a healthcare professional's version (IPQ-R HP) and to perform a preliminary evaluation of its validity and reliability. Methods: After adaptation of the IPQ-R HP, 17 doctors from 3 general hospitals and 9 head nurses from a university hospital evaluated the face and content validity of the IPQ-R HP. The results were quantified using the content validity index (CVI) and a modified kappa index (k*). For the reliability measurements a group of nurses from 4 nursing wards participated at 2 time points with an interval of 4 weeks. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were calculated. Results: Twenty-eight of the 38 items demonstrated excellent content validity and four items showed good content validity. Four items had a sufficient k* and two items had a low CVI. The average CVI of the 7 dimensions ranged from 0.66 to 0.89. The Cronbach's alpha scores for the seven dimensions, intraclass coefficients and effect size estimates were acceptable. Conclusions: This preliminary evaluation of the IPQ-R HP shows an acceptable to good validity and reliability. Further exploration of the psychometric properties of this questionnaire in a large cohort of healthcare professionals is warranted. © 2016 The Author(s).

引用

共 37 条

[21]

Fleming M.P., Martin C.R., Miles J., Atkinson J., The utility of the Illness Perception Questionnaire in the evaluation of mental health practitioners' perspectives on patients with schizophrenia, J Eval Clin Practice., 15, pp. 826-831, (2009)

[22]

Heijmans M., Rijken M., Validation of the IPQ-R in a large, representative Dutch sample, Book of abstracts of the 17th Conference of the European Health Psychology Society, 'European health psychology

[23]

Polit D.F., Beck C.T., Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice, Philadelphia, (2008)

[24]

de Vet H., Beurskens A., Clinimetrics, International Handbook of Advanced Quantitative Methods in Nursing, pp. 44-57, (2016)

[25]

Haynes S.N., Richard D.C.S., Kubany E.S., Content validity in psychological assessment: a functional approach to concepts and methods introduction to content validity, Psycholog Assess., 7, pp. 238-247, (1995)

[26]

Lynn M.R., Determination and quantification of content validity, Nurs Res, 35, 6, pp. 382-385, (1986)

[27]

Polit D.F., Beck C.T., Owen S.V., Focus on research methods: Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations, Res Nurs and Health., 30, pp. 459-467, (2007)

[28]

Wynd C.A., Schmidt B., Schaefer M.A., Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity, West J Nurs Res., 25, pp. 508-518, (2003)

[29]

Fleiss J., Statistical methods for rates and proportions, (1981)

[30]

Cicchetti D.V., Sparrow S.A., Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: applications to assessment of adaptive behavior, Am J Ment Defic., 86, pp. 127-137, (1981)

← 1 2 3 4 →