Validating the Alberta Context Tool in a multi-site Australian Emergency Department nurse population.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
07
10
2018
accepted:
27
03
2019
entrez:
10
4
2019
pubmed:
10
4
2019
medline:
28
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The organisational context of healthcare settings has an essential role in how research evidence is used in clinical practice. The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) measures 10 concepts of organisational context with higher scores indicating a more positive work environment and potentially better use of research evidence in patient care. We assessed the psychometric properties of the ACT in Emergency Departments (EDs). This validation study was conducted as part of a multi-centre trial of triage, treatment and transfer (T3 Trial) of patients with stroke admitted to EDs. Stratified sampling with proportional allocation was used to recruit ED nurses from 26 participating hospitals at baseline. Nurses completed a survey containing the ACT. Structural validity was investigated by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients. Item-rest correlations and the average inter-item correlations were also assessed. 558 ED nurses completed the survey, comprised of 433 surveys without missing data. Our exploratory factor analysis produced a 14-factor structure, explaining 62% of variance of organisational context. For eight of ten concepts, item loadings matched the factor structure of the original ACT. Confirmatory factor analysis of the 10 ACT concepts showed moderate model fit (p = 0.001, root mean square error of approximation: 0.049, standardised root mean squared residual: 0.048). Cronbach's alphas showed very good internal consistency for nine of ten ACT concepts (α>0.7; 0.45-0.90). Item-rest correlations indicated that most ACT items (50 of 56 items) within any concept related well to the total score of the concept. Average inter-item correlations indicated potential redundant items for three concepts (feedback processes, leadership, staffing) that were above the threshold of 0.5. While identifying a few shortcomings for some ACT concepts in an ED context, the majority of findings confirm reliability and validity of the original ACT in an Australian population of ED nurses.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30964916
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215153
pii: PONE-D-18-29140
pmc: PMC6456203
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0215153Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: During the duration of the T3 trial and following receipt of funding, SM was appointed to the Research Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council. Other authors declare that they have no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 22;10(6):e0127405
pubmed: 26098857
Health Care Manage Rev. 2011 Jul-Sep;36(3):252-64
pubmed: 21646884
Implement Sci. 2017 Aug 1;12(1):100
pubmed: 28764752
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Dec 15;9:234
pubmed: 20003531
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Jun 16;10:168
pubmed: 20565714
Nurs Res. 2007 Jul-Aug;56(4 Suppl):S24-39
pubmed: 17625471
Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581-629
pubmed: 15595944
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2014 Aug;11(4):227-39
pubmed: 24986790
J Nurs Care Qual. 2004 Oct-Dec;19(4):297-304
pubmed: 15535533
Br J Sports Med. 2014 Apr;48(8):731-6
pubmed: 24659611
BMC Geriatr. 2013 Oct 18;13:110
pubmed: 24138586
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 Jul 18;11:107
pubmed: 21767378
Implement Sci. 2010 Aug 02;5:60
pubmed: 20673373
J Clin Nurs. 2015 Oct;24(19-20):2815-25
pubmed: 26177787
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Sep 14;13:351
pubmed: 24034149
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2001 Oct;25(5):464-9
pubmed: 11688629
Int J Stroke. 2018 Jan;13(1):96-106
pubmed: 28914187
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 23;17(1):68
pubmed: 28114940
Implement Sci. 2016 Oct 18;11(1):139
pubmed: 27756434
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
Implement Sci. 2011 Dec 28;6:133
pubmed: 22204440
BMJ. 1997 Feb 22;314(7080):572
pubmed: 9055718
Implement Sci. 2016 Apr 21;11:55
pubmed: 27097827
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Feb 19;13:68
pubmed: 23421736
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 Jun 1;16(6):515-20
pubmed: 25805625
Front Psychol. 2016 Sep 07;7:1339
pubmed: 27656156
Emerg Med J. 2012 Dec;29(12):e2
pubmed: 22186010
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 Jun 1;16(6):537.e1-10
pubmed: 25899110
Am J Emerg Med. 2013 Mar;31(3):504-8
pubmed: 23347716
Implement Sci. 2016 Mar 10;11:33
pubmed: 27013464