Validation of the content of the prevention protocol for early sepsis caused by Streptococcus agalactiaein newborns

Abstract

Objective: to validate the content of the prevention protocol for early sepsis caused by Streptococcus agalactiaein newborns.Method: a transversal, descriptive and methodological study, with a quantitative approach. The sample was composed of 15 judges, 8 obstetricians and 7 pediatricians. The validation occurred through the assessment of the content of the protocol by the judges that received the instrument for data collection - checklist - which contained 7 items that represent the requisites to be met by the protocol. The validation of the content was achieved by applying the Content Validity Index.Result: in the judging process, all the items that represented requirements considered by the protocol obtained concordance within the established level (Content Validity Index > 0.75). Of 7 items, 6 have obtained full concordance (Content Validity Index 1.0) and the feasibility item obtained a Content Validity Index of 0.93. The global assessment of the instruments obtained a Content Validity Index of 0.99.Conclusion: the validation of content that was done was an efficient tool for the adjustment of the protocol, according to the judgment of experienced professionals, which demonstrates the importance of conducting a previous validation of the instruments. It is expected that this study will serve as an incentive for the adoption of universal tracking by other institutions through validated protocols.

Streptococcus agalactiae in pregnant women in Brazil: prevalence, serotypes, and antibiotic resistance

“…Besides local government recommendations [15][16][17][18], a group from the Federal University of Pernambuco proposed a protocol based on the CDC guidelines, and submitted it to obstetricians and pediatricians, who evaluated the protocol as judges. The sepsis prevention protocol was considered adequate, and the group recommends the implementation of universal screening at other institutions [64]. Despite this validation, no other research or institution was using this protocol at the time of this publication.…”