刘嘉珍, 童宇平. 急救医疗服务心理弹性量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2021, 39(2): 141-147. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.02.004
引用本文: 刘嘉珍, 童宇平. 急救医疗服务心理弹性量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2021, 39(2): 141-147. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.02.004
LIU Jiazhen, TONG Yuping. Chinesization of Emergency Medical Services Resilience Scale Questionnaire and tests of its reliability and validity[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2021, 39(2): 141-147. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.02.004
Citation: LIU Jiazhen, TONG Yuping. Chinesization of Emergency Medical Services Resilience Scale Questionnaire and tests of its reliability and validity[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2021, 39(2): 141-147. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.02.004

急救医疗服务心理弹性量表的汉化及信效度检验

Chinesization of Emergency Medical Services Resilience Scale Questionnaire and tests of its reliability and validity

  • 摘要:
      目的  对急救医疗服务心理弹性量表(emergency medical services resilience scale,EMSRS)进行汉化并检验中文版量表的适用性。
      方法  获得原作者授权同意后,对EMSRS量表进行翻译修订、跨文化调试,形成中文版EMSRS。采用便利抽样法选取太原市某急救中心252名急救人员进行量表调查并进行条目分析和信度、效度检验。条目区分度采用独立样本t检验分析,信度采用Cronbach’s α系数、折半信度、重测信度来评价;采用专家咨询法测量其内容效度,运用探索性因子分析来验证其结构效度。
      结果  预测试结果显示仅有6.6%的人认为量表的长度和内容不合适或者不清晰,表明原量表接受度较好。项目分析显示31个条目在两组间差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05),故均予以保留。经专家咨询对量表两个条目内容做了调整。最终得到的中文版急救医疗服务心理弹性量表有6个维度、31个条目,探索性因子分析共提取6个公因子,根据条目内容将6个公因子分别命名为工作动机、工作积极性、压力的影响、自我管理、沟通挑战、社会支持,累计方差贡献率为75.717%。量表各条目的CVI(I-CVI)值为0.833~1.000,量表全部条目的平均CVI(S-CVI)值为0.965。量表的Cronbach’s α系数为0.936,各维度Cronbach’s α系数为0.801~0.940,总量表折半信度为0.848,各维度的折半信度为0.750~0.904,总量表重测信度为0.872,各维度重测信度为0.742~0.879。
      结论  汉化后的EMSRS量表具有良好的信度、效度,可作为紧急医疗服务人员心理弹性的调查工具。

     

    Abstract:
      Objective  To Chinesize and optimize the Emergency Medical Services Resilience Scale (EMSRS)and to test the applicability of this Chinese version of the Scale.
      Methods  After obtaining the authorization and consent of the original author, the EMRS questionnaire was translated into Chinese, and then the questionnaire was perfected based on cross-cultural equalization and finalized as the Chinese version. With this questionnaire, 252 emergency personnel in an emergency center in Taiyuan were investigated. The items were analyzed and the reliability and validity were tested. The item discrimination was analyzed by independent sample t test, and the reliability was evaluated by Cronbach's α coefficient, split-half reliability and retest reliability. The content validity was measured by expert consultation method, and the structural validity was verified by exploratory factor analysis.
      Results  The pre-test showed that only 6.6% of the people thought that the length or content of the scale were inappropriate or unclear, indicating that the original scale was acceptable. Project analysis showed the difference of 31 items between two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05), so they were retained. After consulting experts, two items of the scale were adjusted. The Chinese version of EMSRS includes 31 items in 6 dimensions, and 6 common factors are extracted by exploratory factor analysis. According to the items, the 6 common factors have been named as work motivation, work enthusiasm, influence of stress, self-management, communication challenge and social support. The cumulative variance contribution rate was 75.717%. The CVI values of each item(I-CVI) in the scale ranged from 0.833-1.000, and the average CVI value of all items (S-CVI) in the scale was 0.965. The overall Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.936, the Cronbach's α coefficient for each dimension was 0.801-0.940, the split-half reliability for the total scale was 0.848, the split-half reliability for each dimension was 0.750-0.904, the test-retest reliability for the total scale was 0.872, and the test-retest reliability for each dimension was 0.742-0.879.
      Conclusions  The Chinese version of EMSRS scale has good reliability and validity, which can be used as a tool to investigate the psychological resilience of emergency medical service personnel in China.

     

/

返回文章
返回