Cultural adaptation and validation of an instrument on barriers for the use of research results

Ferreira, Maria Beatriz Guimarães; Haas, Vanderlei José; Dantas, Rosana Aparecida Spadoti; Felix, Márcia Marques dos Santos; Galvão, Cristina Maria

doi:10.1590/1518-8345.1652.2852

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem 25 • 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.1652.2852 copy

Cultural adaptation and validation of an instrument on barriers for the use of research results¹ 1 Paper extracted from Doctoral Dissertation “Cultural adaptation and validation of The Barriers to Research Utilization Scale: brazilian portuguese version”, presented to Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. Supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Brazil, process #301909/2010-5

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Objective:

to culturally adapt The Barriers to Research Utilization Scale and to analyze the metric validity and reliability properties of its Brazilian Portuguese version.

Method:

methodological research conducted by means of the cultural adaptation process (translation and back-translation), face and content validity, construct validity (dimensionality and known groups) and reliability analysis (internal consistency and test-retest). The sample consisted of 335 nurses, of whom 43 participated in the retest phase.

Results:

the validity of the adapted version of the instrument was confirmed. The scale investigates the barriers for the use of the research results in clinical practice. Confirmatory factorial analysis demonstrated that the Brazilian Portuguese version of the instrument is adequately adjusted to the dimensional structure the scale authors originally proposed. Statistically significant differences were observed among the nurses holding a Master's or Doctoral degree, with characteristics favorable to Evidence-Based Practice, and working at an institution with an organizational cultural that targets this approach. The reliability showed a strong correlation (r ranging between 0.77 and 0.84, p<0.001) and the internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach's alpha ranging between 0.77 and 0.82).

Conclusion:

the Brazilian Portuguese version of The Barriers Scale was valid and reliable in the group studied.

Descriptors:
Nursing; Research; Evidence-Based Nursing; Validation Studies; Factor Analysis, Statistical; Organizational Culture

Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto / Universidade de São Paulo Av. Bandeirantes, 3900, 14040-902 Ribeirão Preto SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 (16) 3315-3451 / 3315-4407 - Ribeirão Preto - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rlae@eerp.usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding Author: Maria Beatriz Guimarães Ferreira Rua Jonas de Carvalho, 125, Ap. 22 Bairro: Olinda CEP: 38055-440, Uberaba, MG, Brasil E-mail: mariabgfo@gmail.com

Variables		Hospital A		Hospital B		Total
Variables		n	%	n	%	n	%
Training about use of research results in practice
	Yes	93	56.7	124	72.5	217	64.8
	No	71	43.3	47	27.5	118	35.2
Course on the use of research results in practice
	Yes	21	12.8	29	17.0	50	14.9
	No	143	87.2	142	83.0	285	85.1
Training on search for scientific evidence in databases
	Yes	48	29.3	114	66.7	162	48.4
	No	116	70.7	57	33.3	173	51.6
Reading of scientific articles on nursing practice
	Yes	137	83.5	161	94.2	298	89.0
	No	27	16.5	10	5.8	37	11.0
Nursing research development
	Yes	112	68.3	117	68.4	229	68.4
	No	52	31.7	54	31.6	106	31.6

		Factor 1				Factor 2					Factor 3					Factor 4
		x̅	S	p	d		x̅	s	P	d		x̅	s	p	d		x̅	s	p	d
Institution
	Hospital A	2.48	0.66	0.25	0.14		2.97	0.54	<0.001	0.54		2.53	0.64	0.001	0.38		2.62	0.62	<0.001	0.54
	Hospital B	2.39	0.66	0.25	0.14		2.65	0.61	<0.001	0.54		2.29	0.61	0.001	0.38		2.28	0.61	<0.001	0.54
Training on use of research results
	Yes	2.35	0.66	0.001	0.38		2.74	0.60	0.01	0.30		2.33	0.63	0.01	0.30		2.39	0.63	0.03	0.25
	No	2.56	0.64	0.001	0.38		2.92	0.59				2.53	0.64				2.55	0.63
Course on use of research results							2.92	0.59				2.53	0.64				2.55	0.63
	Yes	2.42	0.65	0.84	0.03		2.73	0.58	0.36	0.15		2.24	0.64	0.05	0.30		2.24	0.66	0.01	0.40
	No	2.44	0.67	0.84	0.03		2.82	0.60	0.36	0.15		2.43	0.63	0.05	0.30		2.49	0.62	0.01	0.40
Database search
	Yes	2.39	0.67	0.19	0.15		2.71	0.59	0.004	0.32		2.33	0.62	0.05	0.22		2.33	0.64	0.001	0.39
	No	2.49	0.66	0.19	0.15		2.90	0.59	0.004	0.32		2.47	0.65	0.05	0.22		2.57	0.60	0.001	0.39
Reading articles
	Yes	2.41	0.66	0.02	0.39		2.78	0.60	0.02	0.39		2.37	0.63	0.008	0.49		2.41	0.63	0.005	0.52
	No	2.67	0.66	0.02	0.39		3.01	0.54	0.02	0.39		2.68	0.68	0.008	0.49		2.73	0.55	0.005	0.52
Research development
	Yes	2.41	0.66	0.23	0.14		2.80	0.59	0.84	0.03		2.36	0.61	0.12	0.20		2.39	0.63	0.01	0.30
	No	2.50	0.67	0.23	0.14		2.82	0.62	0.84	0.03		2.49	0.69	0.12	0.20		2.58	0.61	0.01	0.30
Having another job
	Yes	2.49	0.59	0.58	0.09		2.96	0.53	0.05	0.30		2.51	0.54	0.19	0.21		2.59	0.52	0.08	0.27
	No	2.43	0.68		2.78	0.61		2.38	0.65		2.42	0.65

	Test		Retest			ICC*	P		r^†	p
	x̅	s	x̅	S
Factor 1	2.47	0.58	2.46	0.60	0.84	<0.001	0.84	<0.001
Factor 2	2.97	0.48	3.06	0.48	0.83	<0.001	0.83	<0.001
Factor 3	2.51	0.55	2.45	0.59	0.82	<0.001	0.82	<0.001
Factor 4	2.69	0.54	2.65	0.44	0.75	<0.001	0.77	<0.001