Volume 20, Issue 4 (July - August 2021)
Payesh 2021, 20(4): 487-495 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.ARUMS.REC.1398.309
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Heidarzadeh M, Moharramzadeh H, Moharramzadeh N. Psychometric Properties of the Attitude towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention Instrument (APuP) among Nurses. Payesh 2021; 20 (4) :487-495
URL: http://payeshjournal.ir/article-1-1649-en.html
URL: http://payeshjournal.ir/article-1-1649-en.html
1- Nursing and Midwifery School, Ardabil University of Medical sciences, Ardabil, Iran
2- Alzahra teaching hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
3- Medical Emergency and Accident Management Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
2- Alzahra teaching hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
3- Medical Emergency and Accident Management Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract: (2452 Views)
Objective (s): Pressure ulcers are a significant health problem worldwide. Positive attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention have a positive impact on preventive care. This study aimed to determine the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Attitude towards Pressure ulcer Prevention instrument (APuP) in Iranian nurses.
Methods: This was a cross sectional study on a sample of nurses working in ICUs and the internal medicine, surgery, orthopedics, cardiovascular, neurology, and neurosurgery departments in four teaching hospitals in Ardabil, Iran. construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis), internal consistency, and test-retest analyses were performed to determine the psychometric properties of the APuP.
Results: In all 190 nurses partipated in the study. With regard to fitness indices including GFI، AGFI، CFI، RMSEA factor structure of the APuP with five factor and 13 items were confirmed. The Cronbach’s alpha for the overall APuP was 0.70, and correlation coefficient between test-retest was 0.85 (ICC=0.85, p<0.0001).
Conclusion: The findings showed that the Persian version of Attitude towards Pressure ulcer Prevention instrument could be used as a standard tool to assess nurses' attitudes about pressure ulcer prevention.
Methods: This was a cross sectional study on a sample of nurses working in ICUs and the internal medicine, surgery, orthopedics, cardiovascular, neurology, and neurosurgery departments in four teaching hospitals in Ardabil, Iran. construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis), internal consistency, and test-retest analyses were performed to determine the psychometric properties of the APuP.
Results: In all 190 nurses partipated in the study. With regard to fitness indices including GFI، AGFI، CFI، RMSEA factor structure of the APuP with five factor and 13 items were confirmed. The Cronbach’s alpha for the overall APuP was 0.70, and correlation coefficient between test-retest was 0.85 (ICC=0.85, p<0.0001).
Conclusion: The findings showed that the Persian version of Attitude towards Pressure ulcer Prevention instrument could be used as a standard tool to assess nurses' attitudes about pressure ulcer prevention.
type of study: Descriptive |
Received: 2021/05/12 | Accepted: 2021/07/7 | ePublished ahead of print: 2021/07/31 | Published: 2021/09/5
Received: 2021/05/12 | Accepted: 2021/07/7 | ePublished ahead of print: 2021/07/31 | Published: 2021/09/5
References
1. WoundSource. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) Announces a Change in Terminology from Pressure Ulcer to Pressure Injury and Updates the Stages of Pressure Injury. April 21, 2016. Available at: http://www.woundsource.com/blog/national-pressure-ulcer-advisory-panel-npuap-announces-change-interminology- pressure-ulcer. Last accessed December 31, 2020
2. Jiang L, Li L, Lommel L. Nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to pressure injury prevention: A large scale cross sectional survey in mainland China. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2020;29:3311-24 [DOI:10.1111/jocn.15358]
3. Han SH, Kim YS, Hwang J, Lee J, Song MR. Predictors of hospital‐acquired pressure ulcers among older adult inpatients. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2018;27:3780-6 [DOI:10.1111/jocn.14600]
4. Karimian M, Sarokhani D, Sarokhani M, Sayehmiri K, Mortazavi Tabatabai SA. Prevalence of bedsore in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences 2016;26:202-10 [Persian]
5. Fox C. Living with a pressure ulcer: a descriptive study of patients' experiences. British Journal of Community Nursing 2002;7:10-22 [DOI:10.12968/bjcn.2002.7.Sup1.12954]
6. Courvoisier DS, Righi L, Béné N, Rae AC, Chopard P. Variation in pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention in nursing homes: A multicenter study. Applied Nursing Research 2018;42:45-50 [DOI:10.1016/j.apnr.2018.06.001]
7. Tadiparthi S, Hartley A, Alzweri L, Mecci M, Siddiqui H. Improving outcomes following reconstruction of pressure sores in spinal injury patients: a multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 2016;69:994-1002 [DOI:10.1016/j.bjps.2016.02.016]
8. Morehead D, Blain B. Driving hospital-acquired pressure ulcers to zero. Critical Care Nursing Clinics 2014;26:559-67 [DOI:10.1016/j.ccell.2014.08.011]
9. Li Z, Lin F, Thalib L, Chaboyer W. Global prevalence and incidence of pressure injuries in hospitalised adult patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2020;105:103546 [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103546]
10. Amir Y, Lohrmann C, Halfens RJ, Schols JM. Pressure ulcers in four Indonesian hospitals: prevalence, patient characteristics, ulcer characteristics, prevention and treatment. International Wound Journal 2017;14:184-93 [DOI:10.1111/iwj.12580]
11. Samuriwo R, Dowding D. Nurses' pressure ulcer related judgements and decisions in clinical practice: a systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2014;51:1667-85 [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.04.009]
12. Hekmatpou D, Mehrabi F, Rahzani K, Aminiyan A. The effect of Aloe Vera gel on prevention of pressure ulcers in patients hospitalized in the orthopedic wards: a randomized triple-blind clinical trial. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2018;18:1-11 [DOI:10.1186/s12906-018-2326-2]
13. Köse I, Öztunç G. Knowledge of nurses working in intensive care units in relation to preventive interventions for pressure ulcer. International Journal of Caring Sciences 2016;9:677-686
14. Tayyib NA, Coyer F, Lewis P. Pressure ulcers in the adult intensive care unit: a literature review of patient risk factors and risk assessment scales. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice 2013;3:28-42 [DOI:10.5430/jnep.v3n11p28]
15. Berlowitz D. Preventing pressure ulcers in hospitals: a tool kit for improving quality of care. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2012. Available at: http:// www.ahrq.gov/patient safety/settings/hospital/resource/ pressureulcer/tool/index.html. ]Last accessed January 12, 2020[
16. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1991;50:179-211 [DOI:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T]
17. Beeckman D, Defloor T, Demarré L, Van Hecke A, Vanderwee K. Pressure ulcers: development and psychometric evaluation of the attitude towards pressure ulcer prevention instrument (APuP). International Journal of Nursing Studies 2010;47:1432-41 [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.04.004]
18. Aslan A, van Giersbergen MY. Nurses' attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention in Turkey. Journal of Tissue Viability 2016;25:66-73 [DOI:10.1016/j.jtv.2015.10.001]
19. Simonetti V, Comparcini D, Flacco ME, Di Giovanni P, Cicolini G. Nursing students' knowledge and attitude on pressure ulcer prevention evidence-based guidelines: a multicenter cross-sectional study. Nurse Education Today 2015;35:573-9 [DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2014.12.020]
20. Üstün Y. Adapting the "attitude towards pressure ulcer prevention instrument" into Turkish and studying its validity and reliability] Master's Thesis[. Ege Üniversitesi Sa glık Bilimleri Fakültesi; 2013. ]Turkish[
21. Florin J, Bååth C, Gunningberg L, Mårtensson G. Attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention: a psychometric evaluation of the Swedish version of the APuP instrument. International Wound Journal 2016;13:655-62 [DOI:10.1111/iwj.12338]
22. López-Franco MD, Parra-Anguita L, Comino-Sanz IM, Pancorbo-Hidalgo PL. Attitudes of Spanish nurses towards pressure injury prevention and psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of the APuP instrument. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020;17:8543 [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17228543]
23. Akhkand SS, Seidi J, Ebadi A, Gheshlagh RG. Examination of the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the attitude towards pressure ulcer prevention instrument in nurses. Journal of Tissue Viability 2021;30:116-20 [DOI:10.1016/j.jtv.2020.11.001]
24. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health 2005;8:94-104 [DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x]
25. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health 2007;30:459-67 [DOI:10.1002/nur.20199]
26. Grešš Halász B, Bérešová A, Tkáčová Ľ, Magurová D, Lizáková Ľ. Nurses' knowledge and attitudes towards prevention of pressure ulcers. International Journal of Environmental Research And Public Health 2021;18:1705-1714 [DOI:10.3390/ijerph18041705]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and Permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |