Standardised Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP- Adult) Checklist 2.0: Language and Content Validity Study

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2024-12-29 DOI:10.1111/jep.14285
Çiğdem Gamze Özkan, Yeter Kurt, Havva Öztürk
{"title":"Standardised Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP- Adult) Checklist 2.0: Language and Content Validity Study","authors":"Çiğdem Gamze Özkan,&nbsp;Yeter Kurt,&nbsp;Havva Öztürk","doi":"10.1111/jep.14285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Implementation of clinical practice guidelines, an important strategy in the prevention of pressure injuries, enables the nurse to interpret evidence-based guideline recommendations, reduce errors, ensure compliance and standardisation of complex processes, manage patient-related risks and systematically regulate all preventable conditions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study was conducted to ensure the Turkish language and content validity of the Standardised Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP- Adult) Checklist 2.0.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>In this methodological research study, a five-stage technique was used in the translation of the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0, which was created and revised by Joyce Pitmann et al. based on the International 2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines, into Turkish. These stages included initial translation, evaluation of initial translation, back translation, evaluation of back translation and expert opinion. Davis technique was used to determine the content validity of SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The scale was translated into Turkish and back-translated into the original language and the opinions of nine experts were obtained. The content validity scores of the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0 were found to be between 0.88 and 1.0 and the total CGI score was calculated as 0.99. This value shows that content validity is at an acceptable level. After expert evaluations, it was decided that the final version of the scale was appropriate for use.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study demonstrated that the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0 is a valid tool. Interventions using the evidence-based checklist should be integrated into the workflow and provide the best opportunity for successful and sustainable pressure injury prevention.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.14285","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Implementation of clinical practice guidelines, an important strategy in the prevention of pressure injuries, enables the nurse to interpret evidence-based guideline recommendations, reduce errors, ensure compliance and standardisation of complex processes, manage patient-related risks and systematically regulate all preventable conditions.

Objective

This study was conducted to ensure the Turkish language and content validity of the Standardised Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP- Adult) Checklist 2.0.

Method

In this methodological research study, a five-stage technique was used in the translation of the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0, which was created and revised by Joyce Pitmann et al. based on the International 2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines, into Turkish. These stages included initial translation, evaluation of initial translation, back translation, evaluation of back translation and expert opinion. Davis technique was used to determine the content validity of SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0.

Results

The scale was translated into Turkish and back-translated into the original language and the opinions of nine experts were obtained. The content validity scores of the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0 were found to be between 0.88 and 1.0 and the total CGI score was calculated as 0.99. This value shows that content validity is at an acceptable level. After expert evaluations, it was decided that the final version of the scale was appropriate for use.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that the SPIPP- Adult Checklist 2.0 is a valid tool. Interventions using the evidence-based checklist should be integrated into the workflow and provide the best opportunity for successful and sustainable pressure injury prevention.

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
标准化压力伤害预防方案(SPIPP-成人)检查表2.0:语言和内容效度研究。
实施临床实践指南是预防压力性损伤的重要策略,它使护士能够理解基于证据的指南建议,减少错误,确保复杂过程的合规性和标准化,管理与患者相关的风险,并系统地调节所有可预防的疾病。目的:本研究旨在确保标准化压力损伤预防方案(SPIPP-成人)检查表2.0的土耳其语和内容有效性。方法:在本方法学研究中,采用五阶段技术将Joyce Pitmann等人根据国际2019年临床实践指南创建和修订的SPIPP-成人检查表2.0翻译成土耳其语。这些阶段包括初译、初译评价、回译评价、回译评价和专家意见。采用Davis技术测定SPIPP-成人检查表2.0的内容效度。结果:量表被翻译成土耳其语和反翻译成原文,并获得了9位专家的意见。SPIPP-成人检查表2.0的内容效度得分在0.88 ~ 1.0之间,计算CGI总分为0.99。此值表明内容有效性处于可接受的级别。经专家评价,决定最终版本的量表是适合使用的。结论:SPIPP-成人检查表2.0是一种有效的工具。使用循证检查表的干预措施应整合到工作流程中,为成功和可持续的压力损伤预防提供最佳机会。
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
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
期刊最新文献
Transition and Life-Long Care for Adults With Cerebral Palsy: A Patient Group ‘Too Hard to Impact!’ Are We Still Sending Young People ‘Off a Cliff’? Systematic Review of Outcome Measures in Pharmacologically Managed Chronic Pain: Informing a New Outcome Framework for Healthcare Provider-Led Pharmacotherapy Services Investigation of the Effectiveness of a Biopsychosocial-Based Exercise Approach in Rheumatic Diseases: A Mixed Methods Research With Patients' Perspectives Issue Information FungiCAP Survey: Insights Into Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices in Antifungal Prescriptions in Colombia
×
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