Archive \ Volume.15 2024 Issue 2

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Scale: Turkish Validity and Reliability Study

Suzan Güven*✉ , Fadime Çınar , Fatma Eti Aslan
  1. Faculty of Health Sciences, Van Yuzuncu Yıl University, Van, Turkey.
  2. Faculty of Health Sciences, Nisantasi University, Istanbul, Turkey.
  3. Faculty of Health Sciences, Bahçeşehir University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the Turkish validity and reliability of a scale to be used for the assessment of post-intensive care syndrome in patients surviving in the intensive care unit. This is a methodological study in which the Turkish version of the "Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Scale" developed by Jeong and Kang (2019) was performed. The population of the study consists of 350 people. The sample consisted of 225 patients due to voluntary participation, unavailability, and death. The researchers collected data by applying the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Scale. The data in the scale were measured as a number, percentage, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, and mean. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were applied for language and content validity and construct validity of the scale. There was a high level of agreement between the expert opinions regarding the items of the scale in terms of content validity of the "Post Intensive Care Syndrome Scale" (CSR=0.96). Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the scale has a three-factor structure, 17 items explained 69.64% of the total variance, and factor loadings ranged between 0.48-0.86. According to confirmatory factor analysis, Chi-square/sd=2.719 non-normed fit index=0.89 and comparative fit index=0.93. Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient was 0.93. The study results showed the Turkish version of the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome. Scale meets the Turkish version criteria at an acceptable level and can be used in scientific research.


Downloads: 25
Views: 33

How to cite:
Vancouver
Güven S, Çınar F, Aslan FE. Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Scale: Turkish Validity and Reliability Study. Arch Pharm Pract. 2024;15(2):20-5. https://doi.org/10.51847/InxP3DB3C6
APA
Güven, S., Çınar, F., & Aslan, F. E. (2024). Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Scale: Turkish Validity and Reliability Study. Archives of Pharmacy Practice, 15(2), 20-25. https://doi.org/10.51847/InxP3DB3C6

Download Citation
References
  1. Lee M, Kang J, Jeong YJ. Risk factors for post-intensive care syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aust Crit Care. 2020;33(3):287-94.
  2. Brown SM, Bose S, Banner-Goodspeed V, Beesley SJ, Dinglas VD, Hopkins RO, et al. Approaches to addressing post–intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit survivors. A narrative review. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2019;16(8):947-56.
  3. Kerckhoffs MC, Kosasi FFL, Soliman IW, van Delden JJM, Cremer OL, de Lange DW, et al. Determinants of self-reported unacceptable outcome of intensive care treatment 1 year after discharge. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(6):806-14.
  4. Kosinski S, Mohammad RA, Pitcher M, Haezebrouck E, Coe AB, Costa DK, et al. What is post–intensive care syndrome (PICS)? Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;201(8):P15-6.
  5. Davidson JE, Harvey MA. Patient and family post–intensive care syndrome. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2016;27(2):184-6.
  6. Bryant SE, McNabb K. Postintensive care syndrome. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2019;31(4):507-16.
  7. Colbenson GA, Johnson A, Wilson ME. Post-intensive care syndrome: Impact, prevention and management. Breathe (Sheff). 2019;15(2):98-101.
  8. Yuan C, Timmins F, Thompson DR. Post-intensive care syndrome: A concept analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2021;114:103814.
  9. Stam HJ, Stucki G, Bickenbach J. Covid-19 and post-intensive care syndrome: A call for action. J Rehabil Med. 2020;52(4):1-4.
  10. Fernandes A, Jaeger M, Chudow M. Post–intensive care syndrome: A review of preventive strategies and follow-up care. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019;76(2):119-22.
  11. Inoue S, Hatakeyama J, Kondo Y, Hifumi T, Sakuramoto H, Kawasaki T, et al. Post‐intensive care syndrome: Its pathophysiology, prevention, and future directions. Acute Med Surg. 2019;6(3):233-46.
  12. Zante B, Camenisch SA, Schefold JC. Interventions in post-intensive care syndrome-family: A systematic literature review. Crit Care Med. 2020;48(9):e835-40.
  13. Held N, Moss M. Optimizing post-intensive care unit rehabilitation. Turk Thorac J. 2019;20(2):147-52.
  14. Rousseau AF, Prescott HC, Brett SJ, Weiss B, Azoulay E, Creteur J, et al. Long-term outcomes after critical illness: Recent insights. Crit
  15. Smith S, Rahman O. Post intensive care syndrome [Internet]. Accessed: 30.03.2023. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK55 8964/
  16. Jeong YJ, Kang J. Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure post-intensive care syndrome. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2019;55:102756.
  17. İbrahimoğlu Ö, Mersin S, Akyol E. Turkish adaptation of the post-intensive care syndrome questionnaire: A validity and reliability study. Ann Clin Anal Med. 2022;13(4):446-50.
  18. Şencan H. Validity and reliability in social and behavioral measurements. 1th ed. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing; 2005. p. 22-120.
  19. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975;28(4):563-75.
  20. Karasar N. The qualities required in measurement and tools. The scientific research method. 19. Pressing. Ankara: Nobel Publication Distribution; 2023. p. 53-147.
  21. Karadağlı F, Ecevit Alpar Ş. A scale development study: The self-care behavior scale according to the theory of self-care insufficiency in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Mersin Univ J Health Sci. 2017;10(3):168-81.
  22. Çınar F. The role of stakeholder participation in the relationship between the accountability principle and corporate performance; An application in hospital enterprises. Vision E-J. 2015;6(13):12-30.
  23. Öztürk H, Babacan E. A scale development study: The occupational safety scale for medical personnel working in a hospital. J Educ Res Nurs. 2012;9(1):36-42.
  24. Viswanath K, Blake KD, Meissner HI, Saiontz NG, Mull C, Freeman CS, et al. Occupational practices and the making of health news: A national survey of US health and medical science journalists. J Health Commun. 2008;13(8):759-77.
  25. Orçan F. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Which should be used first. J Meas Eval Educ Psychol. 2018;9(4):413-21.
  26. Şimşek ÖF. Introduction to structural equation modeling, basic principles, and LISREL Applications. Ankara: Ekinoks Publications; 2007. p. 9-44.
  27. Yeni T, Enç N. Post-intensive care syndrome and nursing management. J Intensive Care Nurs. 2022;26(1):18-26.
  28. Kahraman BÖ, Kahraman T, Özsoy İ, Tanriverdi A, Papurcu A, Sezgin NH, et al. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the multidimensional dyspnea profile inoutpatients with respiratory disease. Turk J Med Sci. 2020;50(8):1930-40.
  29. Gürsakal S. Multivariate statistical analysis techniques for social sciences. Ankara: Nobel Academic Dissemination; 2022. p. 1-13.

 

 

 

 


Related articles:
Most viewed articles:
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.