Reliability and validity of the revised Rushton Moral Resilience Scale for healthcare workers

被引:8
|
作者
Rushton, Cynda H. [1 ]
Hanson, Ginger C. [1 ]
Boyce, Danielle [1 ]
Holtz, Heidi [2 ]
Nelson, Katie E. [3 ]
Spilg, Edward G. [4 ,5 ]
Robillard, Rebecca [6 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Nursing, 525 N Wolfe St Room 420, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Barnes Coll Nursing, Sch Nursing, St Louis, MO USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Indigenous Hlth, Baltimore, MD USA
[4] Univ Ottawa, Dept Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[5] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Clin Epidemiol Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[6] Univ Ottawa, Sch Psychol, Ottawa, ON, Canada
关键词
anxiety; depression; factor analysis; healthcare workers; measurement; moral distress; moral resilience; stress; PSYCHOMETRIC EVALUATION; FIT INDEXES; DISTRESS; COVID-19; INJURY;
D O I
10.1111/jan.15873
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
AimTo refine the Rushton Moral Resilience Scale (RMRS) by creating a more concise scale, improving the reliability, particularly of the personal integrity subscale and providing further evidence of validity.BackgroundHealthcare workers are exposed to moral adversity in practice. When unable to preserve/restore their integrity, moral suffering ensues. Moral resilience is a resource that may mitigate negative consequences. To better understand mechanisms for doing so, a valid and reliable measurement tool is necessary.DesignCross-sectional survey.MethodsParticipants (N = 1297) had completed & GE;1 items on the RMRS as part of the baseline survey of a larger longitudinal study. Item analysis, confirmatory factor analyses, reliability analyses (Cronbach's alpha), and correlations were used to establish reliability and validity of the revised RMRS.ResultsItem and confirmatory factor analysis were used to refine the RMRS from 21 to 16 items. The four-factor structure (responses to moral adversity, personal integrity, relational integrity and moral efficacy) demonstrated adequate fit in follow-up confirmatory analyses in the initial and hold-out sub-samples. All subscales and the total scale had adequate reliabilities (& alpha; & GE; 0.70). A higher-order factor analysis supports the computation of either subscale scores or a total scale score. Correlations of scores with stress, anxiety, depression and moral distress provide evidence of the scale's validity. Reliability of the personal integrity subscale improved.Conclusion and ImplicationsThe RMRS-16 demonstrates adequate reliability and validity, particularly the personal integrity subscale. Moral resilience is an important lever for reducing consequences when confronted with ethical challenges in practice. Improved reliability of the four subscales and having a shorter overall scale allow for targeted application and will facilitate further research and intervention development.Patient/Public ContributionData came from a larger study of Canadian healthcare workers from multiple healthcare organizations who completed a survey about their experiences during COVID-19.
引用
收藏
页码:1177 / 1187
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Validity and reliability of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised
    Sonmez, Betul
    Ayoglu, Tuluha
    NURSING & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2019, 21 (04) : 428 - 435
  • [22] Reliability and Validity of the Sexual Pressure Scale for Women-Revised
    Jones, Rachel
    Gulick, Elsie
    RESEARCH IN NURSING & HEALTH, 2009, 32 (01) : 71 - 85
  • [23] The Dyadic Communicative Resilience Scale (DCRS): scale development, reliability, and validity
    Skye Chernichky-Karcher
    Maria K. Venetis
    Helen Lillie
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019, 27 : 4555 - 4564
  • [24] The Dyadic Communicative Resilience Scale (DCRS): scale development, reliability, and validity
    Chernichky-Karcher, Skye
    Venetis, Maria K.
    Lillie, Helen
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2019, 27 (12) : 4555 - 4564
  • [25] Turkish adaptation of the resilience scale for nurses: A validity and reliability study
    Senocak, Suleyman U.
    Demirkiran, Fatma
    Totan, Tarik
    NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2021, 107
  • [26] Adaptation of the Vicarious Resilience Scale to Turkish: A Validity and Reliability Study
    Topcu, Feyza
    Boz, Canahmet
    Seneldir-Patolo, Ayse
    Kitapcioglu, Sureyyanur
    Isiker-Bedir, Deniz
    Sanyar, Sema
    PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAUMA-THEORY RESEARCH PRACTICE AND POLICY, 2025,
  • [27] The Reliability and Validity of the Resilience Scale for Adults-Turkish Version
    Basim, H. Nejat
    Cetin, Fatih
    TURK PSIKIYATRI DERGISI, 2011, 22 (02) : 104 - 114
  • [28] Reliability and Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) Spanish Version
    Rodriguez-Rey, Rocio
    Alonso-Tapia, Jesus
    Hernansaiz-Garrido, Helena
    PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2016, 28 (05) : E101 - E110
  • [29] Reliability and validity of the resilience competency scale: Japanese short version
    Terada, Takashi
    Kawano, Hitoshi
    Nagamine, Masanori
    Shigemura, Jun
    Nagamine, Mitsue
    PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES, 2019, 73 (04) : 195 - 195
  • [30] Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the patient on hemodialysis resilience scale
    Eler, Cigdem Oezdemir
    Kav, Sultan
    THERAPEUTIC APHERESIS AND DIALYSIS, 2024, 28 (05) : 745 - 753