Emergency Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
J Adv Nurs. 2022 Apr;78(4):1176-1185. doi: 10.1111/jan.15166. Epub 2022 Feb 7.
To develop and psychometrically test an occupational violence (OV) risk assessment tool in the emergency department (ED).
Three studies were conducted in phases: content validity, predictive validity and inter-rater reliability from June 2019 to March 2021.
For content validity, ED end users (mainly nurses) were recruited to rate items that would appropriately assess for OV risk. Subsequently, a risk assessment tool was developed and tested for its predictive validity and inter-rater reliability. For predictive validity, triage notes of ED presentations in a month with the highest OV were assessed for presence of OV risk. Each presentation was then matched with events recorded in the OV incident register. Sensitivity and specificity values were calculated. For inter-rater reliability, two assessors-trained and untrained-independently assessed the triage notes for presence of OV risk. Cohen's kappa was calculated.
Two rounds of content validity with a total of N = 81 end users led to the development of a three-domain tool that assesses for OV risk using aggression history, behavioural concerns (i.e., angry, clenched fist, demanding, threatening language or resisting care) and clinical presentation concerns (i.e., alcohol/drug intoxication and erratic cognition). Recommended risk ratings are low (score = 0 risk domain present), moderate (score = 1 risk domain present) and high (score = 2-3 risk domains present), with an area under the curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.7-0.81, p < .01). Moderate risk rating had a 61% sensitivity and 91% specificity, whereas high risk rating had 37% sensitivity and 97% specificity. Inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.67 to 0.75 (p < .01), suggesting moderate agreement.
The novel three-domain OV risk assessment tool was shown to be appropriate and relevant for application in EDs. The tool, developed through a rigorous content validity process, demonstrates acceptable predictive validity and inter-rater reliability.
The developed tool is currently piloted in a single hospital ED, with a view to extend to inpatient settings and other hospitals.
开发并心理测量急诊室(ED)职业暴力(OV)风险评估工具。
这项研究分三个阶段进行:2019 年 6 月至 2021 年 3 月期间进行内容有效性、预测有效性和评分者间信度。
为了进行内容有效性,招募 ED 最终用户(主要是护士)对适当评估 OV 风险的项目进行评分。随后,开发了风险评估工具,并对其预测有效性和评分者间信度进行了测试。为了进行预测有效性,对一个月内 OV 发生率最高的 ED 分诊记录进行评估,以确定 OV 风险的存在。然后,将每个案例与 OV 事件登记册中记录的事件进行匹配。计算敏感性和特异性值。为了进行评分者间信度,两名受过培训和未受过培训的评估员独立评估分诊记录中 OV 风险的存在。计算 Cohen's kappa。
两轮内容有效性评估共有 81 名最终用户参与,开发了一个三域工具,该工具使用攻击史、行为问题(即生气、紧握拳头、要求、威胁性语言或抗拒护理)和临床表现问题(即酒精/药物中毒和认知障碍)评估 OV 风险。推荐的风险评分分别为低(评分= 0 个风险域存在)、中(评分= 1 个风险域存在)和高(评分= 2-3 个风险域存在),曲线下面积为 0.77(95%置信区间为 0.7-0.81,p<.01)。中度风险评分的敏感性为 61%,特异性为 91%,而高度风险评分的敏感性为 37%,特异性为 97%。评分者间信度范围为 0.67 至 0.75(p<.01),表明存在中度一致性。
新型三域 OV 风险评估工具在 ED 中应用合适且相关。该工具是通过严格的内容有效性过程开发的,具有可接受的预测有效性和评分者间信度。
该工具目前正在一家医院的 ED 进行试点,旨在扩展到住院病房和其他医院。