Van der Elst Elisa, Deschodt Mieke, Welsch Melanie, Milisen Koen, Dierckx de Casterlé Bernadette
Centre for Health Services and Nursing Research, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35/4, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
BMC Geriatr. 2014 Dec 3;14:128. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-14-128.
Since more people are reaching older and older ages, healthcare systems are becoming in need of more and more knowledgeable nurses to meet the specific health care needs of older persons. Several instruments exist to measure and evaluate students' knowledge of older persons, ageing, and gerontological care; however, unequivocal evidence on their use and psychometric properties is scarce. The aim of the study was to validate a revised version of Palmore's Facts on Aging Quiz (FAQ).
A cross-sectional, exploratory study was conducted. Palmore's FAQ version 1 and Facts on Aging Mental Health Quiz were used as bases for the development of a revised FAQ instrument. Three researchers translated these instruments into Dutch. A panel of nine experts in geriatric research and gerontological care evaluated the translation and the face and content validity of the instrument. We used a cross-sectional, exploratory design to assess its internal consistency and construct validity. Cronbach's alpha coefficients, exploratory factor analysis, and the known-groups technique were used for these analyses.
Based on the experts' consensus, a revised version of the FAQ, consisting of 36 items, was produced. Exploratory factor analysis did not reveal underlying constructs suggesting that the revised version encloses a more general concept of knowledge (e.g. about older persons, aging, gerontological care). Using the known-groups technique, we validated the instrument, showing that it discriminates between the knowledge of first- and third-year nursing students. The overall Cronbach's coefficient of 0.723 was acceptable and changed minimally (from 0.708 to 0.724) when items were removed.
We conclude that the revised version of the FAQ can be used to properly evaluate nursing students' knowledge about older persons and gerontological care, as reasonable reliability and validity were established for this revised version of the FAQ.
随着越来越多的人步入老年，医疗保健系统需要越来越多知识渊博的护士来满足老年人的特定医疗保健需求。有多种工具可用于测量和评估学生对老年人、衰老及老年护理的知识；然而，关于这些工具的使用及其心理测量特性的明确证据却很少。本研究的目的是验证帕尔莫尔衰老知识测验（FAQ）修订版。
进行了一项横断面探索性研究。以帕尔莫尔FAQ第1版和衰老心理健康知识测验为基础开发修订版FAQ工具。三名研究人员将这些工具翻译成荷兰语。由九名老年研究和老年护理专家组成的小组对该工具的翻译以及表面效度和内容效度进行了评估。我们采用横断面探索性设计来评估其内部一致性和结构效度。使用克朗巴哈α系数、探索性因素分析和已知群体技术进行这些分析。
根据专家共识，生成了由36个项目组成的FAQ修订版。探索性因素分析未揭示潜在结构，这表明修订版包含了更广泛的知识概念（如关于老年人、衰老、老年护理）。使用已知群体技术，我们验证了该工具，表明它能够区分一年级和三年级护理专业学生的知识水平。总体克朗巴哈系数为0.723，是可接受的，且在删除项目时变化极小（从0.708变为0.724）。
我们得出结论，FAQ修订版可用于恰当地评估护理专业学生对老年人和老年护理的知识，因为该修订版FAQ已建立了合理的信度和效度。
