Coercion in psychiatry: psychometric validation of the Portuguese Staff Attitudes to Coercion Scale (SACS).

Deborah Oyine Aluh, Diego Diaz-Milanes, Barbara Pedrosa, Manuela Silva, Ugnė Grigaitė, Carolina Rocha Almeida, Maria Ferreira de Almeida Mousinho, Margarida Vieira, Graça Cardoso, José Miguel Caldas-de-Almeida
{"title":"Coercion in psychiatry: psychometric validation of the Portuguese Staff Attitudes to Coercion Scale (SACS).","authors":"Deborah Oyine Aluh, Diego Diaz-Milanes, Barbara Pedrosa, Manuela Silva, Ugnė Grigaitė, Carolina Rocha Almeida, Maria Ferreira de Almeida Mousinho, Margarida Vieira, Graça Cardoso, José Miguel Caldas-de-Almeida","doi":"10.1007/s44192-024-00083-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a growing recognition that staff attitudes toward coercion in mental health care may influence its application. This study presents the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Staff Attitudes towards Coercion Scale (SACS) and describes mental health professionals' attitudes towards coercion in Portugal.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mental health professionals working in five Portuguese mental health services in urban and rural regions of Portugal were invited to complete a questionnaire comprising the SACS and a socio-demographic form. Psychometric analyses including construct validity and internal consistency were carried out using R software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 91 out of 119 questionnaires completed were valid for analysis. Fifty-seven (62.64%) respondents were female, with an age range of 24 to 69 years (M = 39.33; SD = 11.09). More than half of them were nurses (52.75%, n = 48), and a third were psychiatrists (36.26%, n = 33). A three-factor structure was confirmed and showed the best fit compared to previously proposed models with a cumulative explained variance of 59%. The Portuguese SACS exhibited adequate internal consistency for both the full-scale and subscales. The highest mean score was in the pragmatic attitude domain (20.60; SD = 3.37). A negative correlation was observed between the critical attitude domain and both age and years of experience (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A three-factor structure was confirmed and showed the best fit compared to previously proposed models. The Portuguese SACS showed excellent psychometric properties and is acceptable for assessing staff attitudes towards coercion.</p>","PeriodicalId":72827,"journal":{"name":"Discover mental health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11324637/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discover mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-024-00083-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a growing recognition that staff attitudes toward coercion in mental health care may influence its application. This study presents the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Staff Attitudes towards Coercion Scale (SACS) and describes mental health professionals' attitudes towards coercion in Portugal.

Methods: Mental health professionals working in five Portuguese mental health services in urban and rural regions of Portugal were invited to complete a questionnaire comprising the SACS and a socio-demographic form. Psychometric analyses including construct validity and internal consistency were carried out using R software.

Results: A total of 91 out of 119 questionnaires completed were valid for analysis. Fifty-seven (62.64%) respondents were female, with an age range of 24 to 69 years (M = 39.33; SD = 11.09). More than half of them were nurses (52.75%, n = 48), and a third were psychiatrists (36.26%, n = 33). A three-factor structure was confirmed and showed the best fit compared to previously proposed models with a cumulative explained variance of 59%. The Portuguese SACS exhibited adequate internal consistency for both the full-scale and subscales. The highest mean score was in the pragmatic attitude domain (20.60; SD = 3.37). A negative correlation was observed between the critical attitude domain and both age and years of experience (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: A three-factor structure was confirmed and showed the best fit compared to previously proposed models. The Portuguese SACS showed excellent psychometric properties and is acceptable for assessing staff attitudes towards coercion.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
精神病学中的胁迫:葡萄牙工作人员对胁迫的态度量表(SACS)的心理测量验证。
背景:越来越多的人认识到,在心理健康护理中,工作人员对胁迫的态度可能会影响胁迫的应用。本研究介绍了葡萄牙语版工作人员对胁迫的态度量表(SACS)的心理测量特性,并描述了葡萄牙精神卫生专业人员对胁迫的态度:方法:邀请在葡萄牙城乡地区五家精神卫生服务机构工作的精神卫生专业人员填写一份问卷,其中包括SACS和一份社会人口调查表。使用 R 软件进行了心理测量分析,包括构建有效性和内部一致性:在完成的 119 份问卷中,共有 91 份问卷的分析结果有效。57名受访者(62.64%)为女性,年龄在24至69岁之间(男=39.33;女=11.09)。其中一半以上是护士(52.75%,n = 48),三分之一是精神科医生(36.26%,n = 33)。三因素结构得到了证实,与之前提出的模型相比,其拟合度最高,累计解释方差为 59%。葡萄牙语 SACS 的全量表和分量表均显示出足够的内部一致性。实用态度领域的平均分最高(20.60;SD = 3.37)。批判性态度域与年龄和工作年限之间呈负相关(p 结论:批判性态度域与年龄和工作年限之间呈负相关:三因素结构得到了证实,与之前提出的模型相比,其拟合度最高。葡萄牙 SACS 显示出良好的心理测量特性,可用于评估工作人员对胁迫的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Collaborative strategies for adolescent suicide prevention: insights from Slovakia and Kyrgyzstan. Mental distress and associated factors among undergraduate students: evidence from a cross-sectional study at the University of Dodoma, Tanzania. Validation of the Japanese version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4-J) to screen for depression and anxiety. Does major make a difference? Mental health literacy and its relation to college major in a diverse sample of undergraduate students. Understanding community-based mental health interventions among migrant workers in Singapore.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1