Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society · 2014
Reliability and validity of a Turkish language version of the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karahan Azize, Toruner Ebru Kilicarslan, Ceylan Aysun, Abbasoglu Aysel, Tekindal Agah, Buyukgonenc Lale
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate content and construct validity of a Turkish language version of the Bates Wound Assessment Tool (BWAT) as well as its internal consistency and interrater reliability.
SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The study was conducted in 13 intensive care units that included patients with pressure ulcers; the units were located in a university hospital in Central Anatolia, Turkey. The sample comprised 70 nurses and 20 patients who have stage II, III, and IV pressure ulcers.
METHODS: Data were collected between January and April 2011. Content validity was measured using the Davis Technique. The BWAT was scored by 2 groups, nurses with expertise in wound care and staff nurses. An expert nurse and a ward nurse conducted pressure ulcer evaluation on the same patient consecutively in order to determine interrater reliability. We also measured internal consistency via the Cronbach α.
RESULTS: The content validity agreement rate was 0.82. The interrater reliability of the instrument was 0.82; its internal consistency calculated via the Cronbach α was 0.85.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study support the Turkish language version of the BWAT as possessing content validity, interrater reliability and internal consistency.
SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The study was conducted in 13 intensive care units that included patients with pressure ulcers; the units were located in a university hospital in Central Anatolia, Turkey. The sample comprised 70 nurses and 20 patients who have stage II, III, and IV pressure ulcers.
METHODS: Data were collected between January and April 2011. Content validity was measured using the Davis Technique. The BWAT was scored by 2 groups, nurses with expertise in wound care and staff nurses. An expert nurse and a ward nurse conducted pressure ulcer evaluation on the same patient consecutively in order to determine interrater reliability. We also measured internal consistency via the Cronbach α.
RESULTS: The content validity agreement rate was 0.82. The interrater reliability of the instrument was 0.82; its internal consistency calculated via the Cronbach α was 0.85.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study support the Turkish language version of the BWAT as possessing content validity, interrater reliability and internal consistency.