Translation and validation of two evidence‐based nursing practice instruments

THORSTEINSSON H.S. (2012) Translation and validation of two evidence‐based nursing practice instruments. International Nursing Review 59 , 259–265 Background: Using existing instruments when assessing nurses' readiness for evidence‐based practice facilitates comparison of research findings and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:International Nursing Review
Main Author: Thorsteinsson, H. S.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2012
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-7657.2011.00969.x
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fj.1466-7657.2011.00969.x
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1466-7657.2011.00969.x
Description
Summary:THORSTEINSSON H.S. (2012) Translation and validation of two evidence‐based nursing practice instruments. International Nursing Review 59 , 259–265 Background: Using existing instruments when assessing nurses' readiness for evidence‐based practice facilitates comparison of research findings and adds to nursing knowledge in a global context. Aim: The study aims to: (1) translate the Information Literacy for Evidence Based Nursing Practice © (ILNP © ) questionnaire and the Evidence‐based Practice Beliefs Scale © (EBP Beliefs Scale © ), (2) assess their appropriateness for use in Iceland, and 3) estimate the psychometric properties of the translated EBP Beliefs Scale [Icelandic‐EBP Beliefs Scale (I‐EBP Beliefs Scale)]. Methods: The instruments were evaluated for appropriateness and relevancy before translation, and the ILNP © was modified to fit the Icelandic context. Translation followed recommended approaches, including back‐translation. Pilot testing of both instruments ensued. A random sample of 540 nurses answered and returned the questionnaires. Reliability and validity of the I‐EBP Beliefs Scale were tested on 471 complete I‐EBP Beliefs Scale. Data were collected in 2007. Results: The translated instruments demonstrated clarity and conciseness; however, the ILNP © needed to be further modified. For the I‐EBP Beliefs Scale, Cronbach's α was 0.86 and Spearman–Brown r was 0.87. Principal components analysis supported the I‐EBP Beliefs Scale's construct validity and unidimensional structure. Criterion validity was established by known‐groups comparison ( t ‐tests and one‐way analyses of variance). Conclusions: The ILNP © and the EBP Beliefs Scale © can be used in contexts other than those for which they were developed. The I‐EBP Scale is a psychometrically sound instrument and its performance supports the validity of the original scale. The instruments can be used to gather valuable information about nurses' readiness for evidence‐based practice.