病人分类量表的信度与效度研究

目的:引进台湾护理专家徐南丽的病人分类量表(RMT-PCS量表),检测修订版RMT-PCS量表的信度和效度,为中国大陆临床护理工作量的测量提供有效评估工具。方法:研究分3个阶段,第一阶段是修订RMT-PCS量表,第二阶段是由专家对量表进行效度评定,第三阶段是采用修订后的RMT-PCS量表在ICU病区对104例病人进行调查、收集资料、统计分析,对量表的内部一致性进行信度分析。结果:由15名专家对修订版RMT-PCS量表8个维度进行打分,平均分87.73±2.18,内容效度(CVI)为0.86,CVI>0.80;结构效度是用因子分析方差最大正交旋转法,公共因子累计方差百分比为65.37%,因子负荷值为0.416～0.719,因子负荷值>0.40。修订版RMT-PCS量表的信度总体Cronbach’s α系数为0.730,各维度的Cronbach’sα系数为0.642～0.850。结论:修订版RMT-PCS量表具有较好的效度和信度,可以用于我国大陆的临床护理工作量测量。

Reliability and validity test of revised version of Patient Classification System

objective： We introduced the Taiwan version of Rush Medical Tool— Patient Classification Systems （RMT-PCS） modified by Xu Nanli, and revised this version according to the actual condition of Mainland. In this study, we tested the reliability and validity of this revised version of RMT-PCS. Methods： There were three stages for this research. First, we revised the Taiwan version of RMT-PCS. Second, we invited experts in this field to test its validity. Third, we used this scale to investigate 104 patients in ICU to test its reliability. Results： Fifteen experts evaluated this 8-dimension revised RMT-PCS, the average score was 87.73±2.18, and content validity index （CVI） was 0.86. Factor analysis was used to test its structure validity, accumulated variance percentage was 65.37%, factor loading was 0.416~0.719. The general Cronbach＇α was 0.730, and Cronbach＇αof different dimension was 0.642~0.850. Conclusion： The revised version of RMT-PCS has acceptable validity and reliability; it could be used in Mainland China for evaluation of nursing workload.