Elshami Sara, Ibrahim Mohamed Izham Mohamed, Abdel-Rahman Manar E, Rahim Hanan Abdul, Mukhalalati Banan
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Practice, College of Pharmacy, QU Health, Qatar University, PO Box 2713, Doha, Qatar.
Public Health Department, College of Health Sciences, QU Health, Qatar University, PO Box 2713, Doha, Qatar.
BMC Emerg Med. 2025 Mar 6;25(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s12873-025-01199-8.
Over the last fifty years, the frequency and intensity of disasters have escalated, highlighting the importance of healthcare practitioners (HCPs) being thoroughly prepared for disaster management. Despite this pressing need, there is a notable lack of well-developed and rigorously evaluated assessment tools to evaluate disaster preparedness among HCPs across various disciplines and disaster scenarios. This study aims to develop and evaluate a Disaster Management Assessment Tool for Health Care Practitioners (DMAT_HCP).
The DMAT_HCP was designed following the four stages of the Disaster Management Framework and a literature review of similar previously validated tools. Content validity was assessed through two rounds of review by nine and six experts, whereas face validity was assessed by 11 HCPs. DMAT_HCP was tested on 107 HCPs from different health disciplines and settings to evaluate the structural (factor analysis) and construct (convergent and divergent) validities as well as internal consistency reliability.
DMAT_HCP comprised five Likert scales that assess the preparedness and readiness of HCPs for disaster, with satisfactory content validity indices (CVI > 0.83 for six experts). Factor analysis of the entire set of DMAT_HCP items suggested six factors: knowledge, two sub-domains of attitude, practice, willingness to practice, and organization-based management, which together accounted for 77.9% of the variance in the data. Convergent and divergent validity analyses showed that all items within a section had a correlation coefficient greater than 0.4 with their corresponding section score, and they were more strongly correlated with their own section than with scores from other sections. Cronbach's alpha values for the individual sections ranged from 0.89 (attitude) to 0.97 (organization-based management), and the overall Cronbach's alpha for the DMAT_HCP was 0.90.
This study substantiated that DMAT_HCP is both conceptually and methodologically valid and reliable. It has demonstrated strong content validity, accurately measures the intended constructs, and effectively distinguishes between unrelated constructs. The tool also exhibited excellent internal consistency reliability across its components. The tool offers a comprehensive, globally applicable assessment of disaster management, suitable for use across various healthcare professions, settings, disaster contexts, and management phases.
在过去五十年中,灾害的频率和强度不断升级,凸显了医护人员(HCPs)为灾害管理做好充分准备的重要性。尽管有这种迫切需求,但仍明显缺乏完善且经过严格评估的评估工具,以评估不同学科和灾害场景下医护人员的灾害准备情况。本研究旨在开发并评估一种医护人员灾害管理评估工具(DMAT_HCP)。
DMAT_HCP是根据灾害管理框架的四个阶段以及对先前经过验证的类似工具的文献综述设计而成。内容效度通过两轮由九名和六名专家进行的评审来评估,而表面效度由11名医护人员进行评估。DMAT_HCP在来自不同卫生学科和机构的107名医护人员身上进行了测试,以评估其结构效度(因子分析)、构想效度(收敛效度和区分效度)以及内部一致性信度。
DMAT_HCP由五个李克特量表组成,用于评估医护人员对灾害的准备情况和应急能力,其内容效度指数令人满意(六名专家的CVI > 0.83)。对DMAT_HCP所有项目的因子分析表明有六个因子:知识、态度的两个子领域、实践、实践意愿以及基于组织的管理,这些因子共同解释了数据中77.9%的方差。收敛效度和区分效度分析表明,一个部分内的所有项目与其相应部分得分的相关系数大于0.4,并且它们与自身部分的相关性比与其他部分的得分更强。各个部分的Cronbach's alpha值范围从0.89(态度)到0.97(基于组织的管理),DMAT_HCP的总体Cronbach's alpha为0.90。
本研究证实DMAT_HCP在概念和方法上都是有效且可靠的。它具有很强的内容效度,能够准确测量预期的构想,并有效区分不相关的构想。该工具在其各个组成部分也表现出出色的内部一致性信度。该工具提供了一种全面的、全球适用的灾害管理评估,适用于各种医疗保健专业、机构、灾害背景和管理阶段。