背景:住院对老年人来说可能是危险的,但是欧洲大多数医院都没有准备好满足老年成人住院患者的独特需求。物理环境的适应,护理过程,工作人员在老年护理方面的知识和技能对于提高老年人的护理质量至关重要。评估老年人护理的基线组织方法是认识到组织在向老年人提供急性护理服务并试图改善它们时所面临的挑战的重要的第一步。老年机构评估概况可能是这项工作的有希望的工具。
目的:描述在七个国家和语言中实施的系统过程,该过程旨在开发有效且适合文化的老年机构评估概况的翻译。
方法:跨文化工具翻译和内容验证研究。
方法:专家评审小组由来自七个欧洲或欧盟相关国家的68名执业护士组成(奥地利(德语),比利时(荷兰语),丹麦(丹麦语),以色列(希伯来语),波兰(波兰语),瑞士(德语,法语),和土耳其(土耳其语))评估了跨文化相关性,包括翻译,老年机构评估概况。
方法:翻译和验证跨文化调查工具的系统方法,包括背靠背的翻译,适应,并使用每个国家和语言的内容有效性索引(CVI)技术评估内容有效性,分别评估翻译和相关内容的有效性。该项目,针对老年机构评估概况的所有部分的评估者之间的机会协议,计算并调整了子量表和领域内容有效性指数分数:老年护理环境的四个子量表,关于老年人分量表的一般知识,和临床老年知识量表。评估者之间的共识讨论随后最终确定了翻译。
结果:相关性和翻译的CVI得分均在“良好”到“优秀”范围内。老年护理环境量表的CVI评分相关性为0.84~0.94,翻译为0.82~0.98。临床老年知识量表的CVI评分相关性为0.83至0.97,翻译为0.94至0.98。关于老年人的一般知识分量表获得了较高的翻译一致性(0.93至0.99),但相关性得分略低,范围从0.46到0.94。
结论:研究结果提供了初步证据,证明了在不同的医疗保健系统中,年龄友好型护理的多因素措施的适用性和有效性。在德语中,荷兰人,丹麦语,希伯来语,波兰语,法语,土耳其语。
BACKGROUND: Hospitalization can be hazardous for older people, but most hospitals in Europe are not prepared to meet the unique needs of older adult inpatients. Adaptations of the physical environment, care processes, and staff knowledge and skills in geriatric care are essential to improve the quality of care for older people. An assessment of baseline organizational approaches to older adult care is an important first step toward recognizing the challenges organizations face when delivering acute care services to older adults and attempting to improve them. The Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile could be a promising tool for this endeavor.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a systematic process implemented across seven countries and languages that sought to develop valid and culturally-appropriate translations of the Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile.
METHODS: Cross-cultural instrument translation and content validation study.
METHODS: Expert review panels comprised of 68 practicing nurses from seven European or EU associated countries (Austria (German), Belgium (Dutch), Denmark (Danish), Israel (Hebrew), Poland (Polish), Switzerland (German, French), and Turkey (Turkish)) evaluated cross-cultural relevance, including translation, of the Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile.
METHODS: A systematic approach to translating and validating a cross-cultural survey instrument, including back-to-back translation, adaptation, and evaluation of content validity using content validity indexing (CVI) techniques for each country and language, assessing translation and relevance content validity separately. The item, subscale and domain content validity index scores were calculated and adjusted for chance agreement among raters for all parts of the Geriatric Institutional Assessment Profile: the four subscales of geriatric care environment, the general knowledge about older adults subscale, and the clinical geriatric knowledge subscale. Consensus discussions among the raters then finalized translations.
RESULTS: CVI scores for relevance and translation were all in the \"good\" to \"excellent\" range. The geriatric care environment scale\'s CVI scores were 0.84 to 0.94 for relevance and 0.82 to 0.98 for translation. The clinical geriatric knowledge subscale\'s CVI scores were 0.83 to 0.97 for relevance and 0.94 to 0.98 for translation. The general knowledge about older adults subscale received high translation agreement (0.93 to 0.99) but slightly lower scores for relevance, ranging from 0.46 to 0.94.
CONCLUSIONS: Study results provided preliminary evidence of the applicability and validity of a multi-factor measure of age-friendly care in diverse health care systems, in German, Dutch, Danish, Hebrew, Polish, French, and Turkish languages.