Suppr超能文献

检测两种护生压力量表在中国护理学生中的应用:使用探索性因子分析的比较研究。

Testing Two Student Nurse Stress Instruments in Chinese Nursing Students: A Comparative Study Using Exploratory Factor Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052 Henan Province, China.

Department of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.

出版信息

Biomed Res Int. 2020 Oct 7;2020:6987198. doi: 10.1155/2020/6987198. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The development and transformation of nursing within professional tertiary education have exerted a great pressure and challenge upon nursing students. Stress experienced by nursing students is a common precursor of psychological distress and attrition. However, no scale is specifically used to evaluate the sources of stress experienced by nursing students in Mainland China. . This study is aimed at testing and comparing the reliability and validity including sensitivity and specificity of two nursing students' stress instruments, the Chinese version of Student Nurse Stress Index Scale (SNSI-CHI), and the Stressors in Student Nursing Scale (SINS-CN) in Chinese nursing students, and describing the stress status of nursing students in China.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two nursing schools in Henan Province from August 2017 to January 2018. Data were collected by using a questionnaire comprising the Chinese version of SNSI (SNSI-CHI), the Chinese version of SINS (SINS-CN), and the Chinese Perceived Stress Scale (CPSS). Homogeneity and stability, content, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity and specificity were assessed.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's alpha () of SNSI-CHI was 0.90, and the item-to-total correlations ranged from 0.35 to 0.66. The Cronbach's of SINS-CN was 0.93, and the item-to-total correlations ranged from 0.19 to 0.61. The findings of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) confirmed a good construct validity of SNSI-CHI and SINS-CN. The Pearson's rank correlation coefficients, between total scores of SNSI-CHI and CPSS and SINS-CN and CPSS, were assessed to 0.38 ( < 0.01) and 0.39 ( < 0.01), respectively. Regarding the CPSS, as the criterion, the cut-points of SNSI-CHI and SINS-CN for the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were 0.77and 0.66, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both scales are valid and reliable for evaluating the source of stress of student nurses in China. Each has its own characteristics, but the SNSI-CHI demonstrated marginal advantage over the SINS-CN. The SNSI-CHI is short, is easily understood, and with clear dimension for the nursing students, and the SNSI-CHI is more acceptable for the users in China.

摘要

背景

护理在专业高等教育中的发展和转变给护理学生带来了巨大的压力和挑战。护理学生所经历的压力是心理困扰和流失的常见前兆。然而,目前没有专门的量表用于评估中国大陆护理学生所经历的压力源。本研究旨在测试和比较两种护理学生压力量表,即中文版学生护士压力指数量表(SNSI-CHI)和中文版护生压力源量表(SINS-CN)在中国大陆护理学生中的信度和效度,包括敏感性和特异性,并描述中国护理学生的压力状况。

方法

2017 年 8 月至 2018 年 1 月,在河南省的两所护理学校进行了横断面调查。采用问卷收集数据,问卷包括中文版 SNSI(SNSI-CHI)、中文版 SINS(SINS-CN)和中文版知觉压力量表(CPSS)。评估了同质性和稳定性、内容、结构和同时效度以及敏感性和特异性。

结果

SNSI-CHI 的克朗巴赫系数(α)为 0.90,项目与总分的相关性范围为 0.35 至 0.66。SINS-CN 的克朗巴赫系数(α)为 0.93,项目与总分的相关性范围为 0.19 至 0.61。探索性因子分析(EFA)的结果证实了 SNSI-CHI 和 SINS-CN 的良好结构效度。SNSI-CHI 和 CPSS 以及 SINS-CN 和 CPSS 的总得分之间的皮尔逊等级相关系数分别为 0.38(<0.01)和 0.39(<0.01)。关于 CPSS,作为标准,SNSI-CHI 和 SINS-CN 的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线下面积的切点分别为 0.77 和 0.66。

结论

这两种量表都可有效、可靠地评估中国护生的压力源。每个量表都有其自身的特点,但 SNSI-CHI 比 SINS-CN 略具优势。SNSI-CHI 简短,易于理解,维度清晰,更受中国用户的欢迎。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验