Psychometric evaluation of instruments measuring the work environment of healthcare professionals in hospitals: a systematic literature review

Author:

Maassen Susanne M1,Weggelaar Jansen Anne Marie J W2,Brekelmans Gerard1,Vermeulen Hester34,van Oostveen Catharina J25

Affiliation:

1. Department of Quality & Patient Care, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

2. Department of Health Services Management & Organization, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50 (Bayle Building) Postbus 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands

3. Departement of IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare, Geert Grooteplein 21 (route 114) Postbus 9101, 6500 HB, NIjmegen, The Netherlands

4. Departement of Faculty of Health and Social studies, Hogeschool of Arnhem and Nijmegen (HAN) University of Applied Sciences, Kapittelweg 33, Postbus 6960, 6503 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands

5. Department of Wetenschapsbureau, Spaarnegasthuis Academie, Spaarne Gasthuis, Spaarnepoort 1, Postbus 770, 2130 AT Hoofddorp, The Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Research shows that the professional healthcare working environment influences the quality of care, safety climate, productivity, and motivation, happiness, and health of staff. The purpose of this systematic literature review was to assess instruments that provide valid, reliable and succinct measures of health care professionals’ work environment (WE) in hospitals. Data sources Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL EBSCOhost and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception through December 2018. Study selection Pre-defined eligibility criteria (written in English, original work-environment instrument for healthcare professionals and not a translation, describing psychometric properties as construct validity and reliability) were used to detect studies describing instruments developed to measure the working environment. Data extraction After screening 6397 titles and abstracts, we included 37 papers. Two reviewers independently assessed the 37 instruments on content and psychometric quality following the COSMIN guideline. Results of data synthesis Our paper analysis revealed a diversity of items measured. The items were mapped into 48 elements on aspects of the healthcare professional’s WE. Quality assessment also revealed a wide range of methodological flaws in all studies. Conclusions We found a large variety of instruments that measure the professional healthcare environment. Analysis uncovered content diversity and diverse methodological flaws in available instruments. Two succinct, interprofessional instruments scored best on psychometrical quality and are promising for the measurement of the working environment in hospitals. However, further psychometric validation and an evaluation of their content is recommended.

Funder

ZonMW

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3