Revising Of Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle Scale And Applying In Nursing

Objective (1) To translate and revise the Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle Scale(AEROS) and test the validity and reliability of it, and to provide a standardized measurement tool for understanding the nurses’ reporting obstacle in the context of Chinese culture;(2) To investigate the attitude and reporting obstacle of nurses after different level adverse events happened in secondary and tertiary hospital in Hunan Province, and to analyze the affecting factors of nurses’reporting obstacle.Methods (1) The new Chinese version of Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle Scale was translated and revised,4items was added through our literature review, expert discussions, nurses interview.(2)As random sampling,2,800nurses of seven tertiary hospitals and fourteen secondary hospitals were investigated according the information of the health department of Hunan Province. Each subject completes each questionnaire as tools for this study. Excel databases were created, and statistical analyses were performed with the SPSS17.0and AMOS7.0statistics package.(3) A revised Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle scale of16items was developed after an item-by-item factor analysis of the original items. The reliability of the scale was tested in terms of test-retest reliability and homogeneity reliability, and the validity of the scale was tested in terms of content validity and construct validity.(4)T-test, ANOVA, Student-Newman-Keuls and Multiple linear regression were used to determine difference between different nurses.Results (1) The revised Child Psychological Maltreatment Scale consists of16items covering four dimensions. The test-retest reliability of dimensions and the scale was0.719-0.889,The Cronbach’s Alpha was0.700-0.833; The correlations between the Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle scale and its four dimensions were0.540-0.790; the correlations among the four dimensions were0.274-0.453; the exploratory factor analysis revealed that each item has moderate to strong loading on its corresponding factors, and the four extracted factors explained55.698%of the total variance; the adjusted goodness-of-fit index, the relative goodness-of-fit index, and the non-standard goodness-of-fit index of the confirmatory factor analysis were all0.905-0.935, with the root mean square error of approximation less than0.1.(2) In the seven possible reactions after nursing events happened, the highest rate of choosing’will not do’according to the item’talking with many colleagues’, the highest rate of choosing’unsure’according to the item’reporting to the incidents reporting system’, the highest rate of choosing’will do’according to the item’reporting to the matron’.(3) The score of reporting obstacle showed statistically significant differences (P<0.05) in its distribution among different variables of nursed. The multiple linear regression indicated that the score of reporting obstacle became higher with higher stress recognition, lower job satisfaction, lower safety climate, higher level of completed education and lower level of hospital.Conclusion (1) The Adverse Events Reporting Obstacle Scale has good reliability and validity, can well meet the requirements of psychological measurement and is fit for dissemination into practical applications.(2) The analysis of attitude of nurses towards adverse events indicated that the view of head nurse and colleagues is very important. The revise of the incident events reporting system is necessary.(3) As condemned climate still was the main obstacle, we need to palliate this perception of nurse to improve reporting. During the management of adverse events, nurses’stress recognition and job satisfaction must be the focus attention. Another advice is that add the training of adverse events management to curriculum projects for senior nurses to translate their attitude.