Validity and reliability of the persian practice environment scale of nursing work index

Elmi, Safa; Hassankhani, Hadi; Abdollahzadeh, Farahnaz; Abadi, Mohammad Asghari Jafar; Scott, Judy E.; Nahamin, Mina

doi:10.4103/1735-9066.205953

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are congruent with those from other studies where using CFA, investigators demonstrated adequate to good model fit using the same or similar PES-NWI factor structure (Elmi et al, 2017;Havens et al, 2012). Elmi et al (2017) reported CFI and nonnormative fit indices (also known as TLI) as >0.90, which is consistent with our findings. A difference between our analysis and Elmi et al′s (2017) is that our χ 2 and RMSEA values were inflated due to the large sample size.…”

Section: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Modelssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Elmi et al (2017) reported CFI and nonnormative fit indices (also known as TLI) as >0.90, which is consistent with our findings. A difference between our analysis and Elmi et al′s (2017) is that our χ 2 and RMSEA values were inflated due to the large sample size.…”

Section: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Modelssupporting

confidence: 92%

“…By contrast, a different factor (subscale) structure was found in studies conducted among RNs in Iran (Elmi et al, 2017), Taiwan (Chiang & Lin, 2008), and Asian-born RNs practicing in a U.S. setting (Liou & Cheng, 2009). The authors of these three studies identified latent constructs that retained some of the factors from the original PES-NWI, and identified new factors such as leading and supporting (Elmi et al, 2017), professional development (Chiang & Lin, 2008), and nursing participation and development (Liou & Cheng, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examining the measurement invariance of the Practice Environment Scale–Nursing Work Index in the United States

Nunez

Wambach

Cramer

2020

Research in Nursing & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasingly diverse nursing workforce in the United States often creates challenges for researchers in meaningfully interpreting survey data from large samples of nurses with heterogeneous cultural backgrounds. Considering this, the purpose of this study was to determine the measurement invariance of the Practice Environment Scale–Nursing Work Index (PES‐NWI) between registered nurses (RNs) reporting as Asian/Pacific Islander and those reporting as White. Data from the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators®, collected in 2018 from RNs (N = 27,619) providing direct patient care, were used in this study. Multi‐group confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine measurement invariance. Interpretation of the fit indices across models (configural, metric, and scalar) provides support for measurement invariance of the PES‐NWI across the two groups. There is empirical support for pooling PES‐NWI data and comparing it across these two groups.

show abstract

Section: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Modelssupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Confirmatory Factor Analysis Modelssupporting

confidence: 92%

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining the measurement invariance of the Practice Environment Scale–Nursing Work Index in the United States

Nunez

Wambach

Cramer

2020

Research in Nursing & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Obstajajo različni instrumenti za merjenje psihološkega stresa ter obremenitev na delovnem mestu (Nuebling, et al, 2006), oceno delovnega mesta zaposlenega (Bai, et al, 2015), vpliva delovnega okolja na klinično prakso v zdravstveni negi (Elmi, et al, 2017;Jing, et al, 2017;Ogata, et al, 2018) in oceno zdravega delovnega okolja (Huddleston, et al, 2017).…”

Section: Uvodunclassified

Veljavnost in zanesljivost vprašalnika o potencialnih dejavnikih stresa zaposlenih v zdravstveni negi v slovenskih bolnišnicah

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uvod: Zaposleni v zdravstveni negi so izpostavljeni številnim dejavnikom stresa. V slovenskem prostoru doslej nismo imeli instrumenta za merjenje stresa med zaposlenimi v zdravstveni negi. Namen raziskave je bil validirati vprašalnika o merjenju stresorjev, ki so jim izpostavljeni zaposleni v zdravstveni negi v slovenskih bolnišnicah.Metode: Uporabljena je bila kvantitativna deskriptivna metoda, s kavzalno-neeksperimentalnim raziskovalnim dizajnom. Podatki so bili zbrani s pomočjo vprašalnikov »Lestvica za merjenje stresa« in »Stres na delovnem mestu bolnišničnih zdravstvenih delavcev«, združenih v merski instrument »Potencialni dejavniki stresa pri zaposlenih v zdravstveni negi«. Validacija vprašalnika je bila izvedena na priložnostnemvzorcu 983 zaposlenih v 21 slovenskih bolnišnicah. Podatki so analizirani z opisnimi metodami in faktorsko analizo.Rezultati: Z eksploratorno faktorsko analizo je preostalo 34 spremenljivk, ki pojasnijo 68 % celotne variabilnosti. Vrednosti Kaiser-Meyer-Olkinove mere primernosti vzorca in Bartletovega testa sferičnosti (KMO = 0,931, Bartlett: χ2(561) = 9670,501, p < 0,001) so se izkazale kot primerne za izvedbo eksploratorne faktorske analize, s katero smo dobili devet faktorjev. Vprašalnik je zanesljiv, vrednosti koeficienta Cronbach α se gibljejo na intervalu od 0,805 do 0,932.Diskusija in zaključek: Vprašalnik je zanesljiv in veljaven instrument za merjenje potencialnih stresorjev v zdravstveni negi v slovenskih bolnišnicah in odpira možnosti primerjav z veljavnimi instrumenti v tujini. Merilni instrument je namenjen managerjem v zdravstveni negi.

show abstract

“…Referring to the tools used to measure the work climate in health services, we find several different instruments (Elmi et al, 2017 ), some of which are specific to concrete professions, such as nursing (Olsen et al, 2017 ) or anesthesiology (Rama-Maceiras et al, 2012 ), and certain fields such as mental health (Ehrhart et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An adequate work climate fosters productivity in organizations and increases employee satisfaction. Workers in emergency health services (EHS) have an extremely high degree of responsibility and consequent stress. Therefore, it is essential to foster a good work climate in this context. Despite this, scales with a full study of their psychometric properties (i.e., validity evidence based on test content, internal structure and relations to other variables, and reliability) are not available to measure work climate in EHS specifically. For this reason, our objective was to develop a scale to measure the quality of work climates in EHS. We carried out three studies. In Study 1, we used a mixed-method approach to identify the latent conceptual structure of the construct work climate. Thus, we integrated the results found in (a) a previous study, where a content analysis of seven in-depth interviews obtained from EHS professionals in two hospitals in Gibraltar Countryside County was carried out; and (b) the factor analysis of the responses given by 113 EHS professionals from these same centers to 18 items that measured the work climate in health organizations. As a result, we obtained 56 items grouped into four factors (work satisfaction, productivity/achievement of aims, interpersonal relationships, and performance at work). In Study 2, we presented validity evidence based on test content through experts' judgment. Fourteen experts from the methodology and health fields evaluated the representativeness, utility, and feasibility of each of the 56 items with respect to their factor (theoretical dimension). Forty items met the inclusion criterion, which was to obtain an Osterlind index value greater than or equal to 0.5 in the three aspects assessed. In Study 3, 201 EHS professionals from the same centers completed the resulting 40-item scale. This new instrument produced validity evidence based on the internal structure in a second-order factor model with four components (RMSEA = 0.079, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.97; NFI = 0.95, and NNFI = 0.97); absence of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in 80% of the items; reliability (α = 0.96); and validity evidence based on relations to other variables, specifically the test-criterion relationship (ρ = 0.680). Finally, we discuss further developments of the instrument and its possible implications for EHS workers.

show abstract

Validity and reliability of the persian practice environment scale of nursing work index

Cited by 18 publications

References 18 publications

Examining the measurement invariance of the Practice Environment Scale–Nursing Work Index in the United States

Examining the measurement invariance of the Practice Environment Scale–Nursing Work Index in the United States

Veljavnost in zanesljivost vprašalnika o potencialnih dejavnikih stresa zaposlenih v zdravstveni negi v slovenskih bolnišnicah

Development of a Work Climate Scale in Emergency Health Services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About