The Chinese version of Defensive Medicine Scale (DMS): reliability and validity test among physicians

中文版防御医学量表(DMS):医师信效度检验

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physicians are inclined to resort to defensive medicine (DM) for self-protection due to the increasing potential risk of medical litigation. DM is globally prevalent and has become an impediment to the development of healthcare. However, there is a lack of validated tools specifically designed to assess DM in China. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Defensive Medicine Scale (DMS) among clinicians to provide a practicable tool for relevant research. METHODS: The present research consists of two phases. In Phase 1, DMS was administered to survey 327 physicians, and the collected data were obtained for item analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Phase 2 applied DMS to survey 323 physicians, from which the data was used for confirmatory factor analysis, and reliability and cross-cohort consistency tests. Moreover, the participants of Phase 2 were required to complete Workplace Well-Being Scale (WWBS), Career Commitment Scale (CCS), Occupational Disidentification Scale (ODS), Intent to Leave Scale (ILS), and Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire (DDPRQ-10) to test the convergent validity of DMS. RESULTS: The Chinese version of DMS consists of 10 items divided into 2 dimensions, Positive Defensive Medicine (PDM) and Negative Defensive Medicine (NDM). The confirmatory factor analysis showed that the two-factor model fitted well (χ(2)/df = 2.540, RMSEA = 0.069, CFI = 0.981, IFI = 0.981, TLI = 0.971, PNFI = 0.646, PCFI = 0.654, SRMR = 0.044). Furthermore, the total score and the score of each dimension for DMS had a significant negative correlation with WWBS and CCS scores, and a significant positive correlation with ODS, ILS, and DDPRQ-10 scores. The Cronbach's α coefficients for the total DMS and PDM and NDM dimensions were 0.917, 0.935, and 0.842, respectively; the split-half reliability coefficients were 0.922, 0.947, and 0.839, respectively. In addition, DMS showed cross-gender invariance. CONCLUSION: The Chinese version of DMS has been demonstrated to be an effective tool to assess defensive medicine among Chinese physicians with good psychometric properties.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。