Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T07:14:20.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Psychometric Evaluation of the Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool© (DPET) on Emergency Nurses in Mainland China: Two Cross-Sectional Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2021

Jia Wang ,
Sihui Lu ,
Xinglan Sun ,
Fen Wang ,
Meijuan Wan ,
Hanxi Chen  and
Yibing Tan Open the ORCID record for Yibing Tan [Opens in a new window]
Jia Wang
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Sihui Lu
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Xinglan Sun
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Fen Wang
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Meijuan Wan
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Hanxi Chen
Affiliation:
Burns Department, Guangdong General Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Yibing Tan*
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
*
Corresponding author: Yibing Tan, Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Emergency nurses play a major role in disaster relief in mainland China, but there is no valid instrument to measure the extent of their disaster preparedness. The Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool© is a reliable instrument to assess the disaster preparedness of nurse practitioners. The tool has been translated and validated in Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, China and the United States of America.

Objectives:

This study aimed at translating and adapting the Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool© (DPET) for emergency nurses in mainland China and determining its psychometric properties.

Design, Settings and Participants:

A total of 2 cross-sectional online surveys were conducted in the emergency departments of 26 public grade III-A hospitals in Guangdong, mainland China. In the first study, 633 emergency nurses were recruited from May to August, 2018. In the second study, 205 were recruited in April 2019.

Methods:

The instrument was adapted through rigorous forward-backward translation, face validity, and pre-test processes. Exploratory factor and parallel analyses were used in the first study. Confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency and split-half reliability were used in the second study.

Results:

Exploratory factor and parallel analyses extracted a 5-factor solution comprising of 34 items that accounted for 64.06% of the total variance. The fit indices indicated a good model fit. The reliability was good, as indicated by a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.97 and a split-half reliability coefficient of 0.97.

Conclusion:

The mainland China version of the DPET (DPET-MC) was a reliable and valid instrument and can be used in practice.

Keywords

disaster preparednessinstrumentmainland chinaemergency nursespsychometrics
Type
Original Research
Information
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , June 2022 , pp. 1083 - 1090
Copyright
© 2021 Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Usuzawa, M, Telan, EO, Kawano, R, et al. Awareness of disaster reduction frameworks and risk perception of natural disaster: A questionnaire survey among Philippine and Indonesian health care personnel and public health students. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2014;233(1):43–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albrecht, F. Natural hazard events and social capital: The social impact of natural disasters. Disasters. 2018;42(2):336–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaillancourt, A, Haavisto, I. Country logistics performance and disaster impact. Disasters. 2016;40(2):262–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Said, NB, Chiang, VCL. The knowledge, skill competencies, and psychological preparedness of nurses for disasters: A systematic review. Int Emerg Nurs. 2020;48:100806.Google ScholarPubMed
Rokkas, P, Cornell, V, Steenkamp, M. Disaster preparedness and response: challenges for Australian public health nurses - a literature review. Nurs Health Sci. 2014;16(1):60–66.Google ScholarPubMed
Al Thobaity, A, Plummer, V, Williams, B. What are the most common domains of the core competencies of disaster nursing? A scoping review. Int Emerg Nurs. 2017;31:64–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, D, Liu, Y, Deng, X, et al. Earthquake disaster risk perception process model for rural households: A pilot study from Southwestern China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(22):4512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hao, X, Li, X, Zheng, J. Screening China Emergency Medical Team (CEMT) Members: A Self-Leadership perspective. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(6):596–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, Y, Turale, S, Stone, TE, Petrini, M. A grounded theory study of ‘turning into a strong nurse’: Earthquake experiences and perspectives on disaster nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(9):e43–e49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usher, K, Mills, J, West, C, et al. Cross-sectional survey of the disaster preparedness of nurses across the Asia-Pacific region. Nurs Health Sci. 2015;17(4):434–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tavan, H, Menati, W, Azadi, A, Sayehmiri, K, Sahebi, A. Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure Iranian Nurses’ knowledge, attitude and practice regarding disaster Preparedness. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(8):IC06–IC09.Google ScholarPubMed
Georgino, MM, Kress, T, Alexander, S, Beach, M. Emergency preparedness education for nurses: Core competency familiarity measured utilizing an Adapted Emergency Preparedness Information Questionnaire. J Trauma Nurs. 2015;22(5):240–E2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wisniewski, R, Dennik-Champion, G, Peltier, JW. Emergency preparedness competencies: Assessing nurses’ educational needs. J Nurs Adm. 2004;34(10):475–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tichy, M, Bond, AE, Beckstrand, RL, Heise, B. Nurse practitioners’ perception of Disaster Preparedness Education. AJNP. 2009;13(1):10–22.Google Scholar
Chen, TF, Chou, KR, Liao, YM, Ho, CH, Chung, MH. Construct validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool in Taiwan. J Clin Nurs. 2015;24(7-8):1132–1143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Khalaileh, MA, Bond, AE, Beckstrand, RL, Al-Talafha, A. The Disaster Preparedness Evaluation Tool: Psychometric testing of the classical Arabic version. J Adv Nurs. 2010;66(3):664–672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Öztekin, SD, Larson, EE, Akahoshi, M, Öztekin, İ. Japanese nurses’ perception of their preparedness for disasters: Quantitative survey research on one prefecture in Japan. Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2016;13(3):391–401.Google ScholarPubMed
Al-Khalaileh, MA, Bond, E, Alasad, JA. Jordanian nurses’ perceptions of their preparedness for disaster management. Int Emerg Nurs. 2012;20(1):14–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sangkala, MS, Gerdtz, MF. Disaster preparedness and learning needs among community health nurse coordinators in South Sulawesi Indonesia. Australas Emerg Care. 2018;21(1):23–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, HC, Spritzer, N, Al-Azzeh, N. Perceived knowledge, skills, and preparedness for disaster management among military health care personnel. Mil Med. 2019;184(9-10):e548–e554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, YH, Li, J, Shieh, SI, et al. Comparison of professional values between nursing students in Taiwan and China. Nurs Ethics. 2016;23(2):223–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, Z, Sheng, Y. A survey of emergency nurses’ disaster preparedness. Chinese Journal of Nursing. 2014;49(06):699–703.Google Scholar
Beaton, DE, Bombardier, C, Guillemin, F, Ferraz, MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186–3191.Google ScholarPubMed
Perneger, TV, Courvoisier, DS, Hudelson, PM, Gayet-Ageron, A. Sample size for pre-tests of questionnaires. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(1):147–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Elm, E, Altman, DG, Egger, M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–1457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaskin, CJ, Happell, B. On exploratory factor analysis: A review of recent evidence, an assessment of current practice, and recommendations for future use. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014;51(3):511–521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cappelleri, JC, Bushmakin, AG, Harness, J, Mamolo, C. Psychometric validation of the physician global assessment scale for assessing severity of psoriasis disease activity. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(9):2489–2499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cattell, RB. The Scree Test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behav Res. 1966;1(2):245–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Balhan, EM, Khabbache, H, Watfa, A, Re, TS, Zerbetto, R, Bragazzi, NL. Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the nomophobia questionnaire: Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis - implications from a pilot study in Kuwait among university students. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2018;11:471–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Connor, BP. SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and velicer’s MAP test. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2000;32(3):396–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weng, L-J, Cheng, C-P. Is categorization of random data necessary for parallel analysis on Likert-type data? Commun Stat-Simul C. 2017;46(7):5367–5377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull. 1990;107(2):238–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schermelleh-Engel, K, Kerwer, M, Klein, AG. Evaluation of model fit in nonlinear multilevel structural equation modeling. Front Psychol. 2014;5:181.Google ScholarPubMed
Streiner, DL. Starting at the beginning: An introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. J Pers Assess. 2003;80(1):99–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scale Reliability, Raykov T., Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha, and violations of essential Tau-Equivalence with fixed Congeneric Components. Multivariate Behav Res. 1997;32(4):329–353.Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Zhou, F, Ge, X, et al. Reliability and validity of an indicator system used to evaluate outpatient and inpatient satisfaction in Chinese hospitals. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:2527–2536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–2194.Google Scholar
Lee, CH, Chaou, CH, Lin, CC. The progress of emergency medicine in Taiwan, China, and Hong Kong: Perspective from publications in Emergency Medicine Journals, 1992-2011. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:682375. http://http://doi.org/10.1155/2014/682375.Google Scholar
Loven, WU, Yngman-Uhlin, P, Hjortswang, H, et al. Development of a self-care questionnaire for clinical assessment of self-care in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A psychometric evaluation. Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;89:1–7.   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.08.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xia, R, Li, S, Chen, B, Jin, Q, Zhang, Z. Evaluating the effectiveness of a disaster preparedness nursing education program in Chengdu, China. Public Health Nurs. 2020;37(2):287–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed