RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Currently, little evidence supports the notion that improved practical skills through simulation education are reflected in actual clinical practice and ultimately lead to positive outcomes for participants. However, by clarifying the relationship between the simulation foundation and its practicality, insights can be gained to develop educational programs to improve clinical reasoning skills. However, no clear scale is currently available in Japan. AIMS: To create a valid Japanese version of the clinical reasoning skills self-evaluation scale and evaluate its reliability and validity. METHODS: This instrument design study included 580 nursing students and nurses surveyed online from February to March 2023. The clinical reasoning skills self-evaluation scale was translated into Japanese using a back-translation method, and semantic equivalence and content validity were assessed. The content validity index was assessed using a pilot test involving 26 clinical nurses, 25 nursing students, and an expert panel. Validity and reliability were tested using a convenience sample of 580 nursing students and nurses. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for all dimensions was >0.7, and the questionnaire showed acceptable internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.674-0.797, all dimensions); the lowest value at a 95% confidence interval was 0.504 (at least moderate reliability). CONCLUSION: Our scale has acceptable validity and reliability. It may help in clinical reasoning skill assessment for nurses and nursing students and aid in examining and supporting these skills.
RESUMO
CONTEXT: The Dyspnea-12 questionnaire is a simple tool to assess dyspnea using qualitative descriptors that include both physical and emotional domains. However, the reliability and validity of the Japanese version in patients with lung cancer have not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Dyspnea-12 questionnaire in patients with lung cancer. METHODS: The assessment was based on the numerical rating scale (NRS), cancer dyspnea scale (CDS), and hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS). Spearman's correlation assessed the convergent validity of Dyspnea-12 using these three scales. Exploratory factor analysis examined the construct validity. The reliability was verified using Cronbach's alpha. Anxiety, depression, clinical dyspnea, presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and patient status were identified by discriminating performance. RESULTS: The analysis included 113 patients with lung cancer. A significant positive correlation was found between Dyspnea-12 and NRS, CDS, and HADS scores. Similar to the original version, factor analysis clearly classified Dyspnea-12 into two components (physical and emotional), thereby confirming its construct validity. Cronbach's alpha values for the total Dyspnea-12 and its physical and emotional components were 0.97, 0.95, and 0.96, respectively. Patients with anxiety, depression, and clinical dyspnea and those in the palliative phase had significantly higher Dyspnea-12 scores than their respective counterparts. The Dyspnea-12 scores of patients with and without COPD were similar. CONCLUSION: The Japanese version of the Dyspnea-12 questionnaire is a useful and reliable tool to assess the multi-dimensional aspects of dyspnea in patients with lung cancer.