妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表的编制及信效度检验

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2024.06.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的编制妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表，检验其信效度并进行初步应用。方法以健康信念模型为理论框架，通过文献分析、半结构式访谈、德尔菲专家函询和预调查形成量表初稿。采取便利抽样法，于2022年9月—10月对泉州市4所医院的276例妊娠期糖尿病孕妇进行量表的条目筛选和信效度检验。于2022年11月—12月对泉州市3所医院的335例妊娠期糖尿病孕妇进行量表结构的验证及初步应用。结果妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表包含4个维度、29个条目。探索性因子分析提取4个因子，累计方差贡献率为79.93%。总量表的Cronbach’s α系数为0.932，折半信度为0.949，重测信度为0.757，内容效度指数为0.900。验证性因子分析结果显示，量表因子结构稳定。初步应用结果显示，妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表得分为（116.53±15.82）分，文化程度、上网搜索控制血糖方式的频率、家庭人均月收入是影响其风险感知的因素（P<0.05）。结论妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表的信效度良好，可作为医护人员测评妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知的工具。妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知处于中等水平，护理人员应加强对文化程度低、低收入及参与相关学习频率低的妊娠期糖尿病孕妇的关注。

关键词: 妊娠期糖尿病, 风险感知, 量表, 信效度, 护理评估, 血糖管理

Abstract:

Objective To develop and test the reliability and validity of a risk perception scale for pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus（GDM），and to make a preliminary application. Methods Using the Health Belief Model as a theoretical framework，a first draft of the scale was developed through literature analysis，semi-structured interviews，expert correspondence and a pre-survey. From September to October 2022，276 pregnant women with GDM were recruited from 4 hospitals in Quanzhou City by convenience sampling method to screen entries and test the reliability of the scale. The validation and initial application of the scale structure was completed by recruiting 335 pregnant women with GDM in 3 other hospitals in Quanzhou City from November to December 2022. Results The risk perception scale for pregnant women with GDM contained 4 dimensions and 29 items. Exploratory factor analysis extracted 4 factors with a cumulative variance contribution of 79.93%. The Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.932；the fold-half reliability was 0.949；the test-retest reliability was 0.757；the content validity was 0.900. The results of the validation factor analysis showed that the scale factor structure was stable. The mean total risk perception score of pregnant women with GDM was 116.53±15.82. Literacy，frequency of internet searches for ways to control blood glucose，and per capita monthly household income were factors that influenced the risk perception of pregnant women with GDM（P<0.05）. Conclusion The risk perception scale for pregnant women with GDM has good reliability and validity，and it can be used as a tool for health care professionals to measure the perceived risk of pregnant women with GDM. The perceived risk of pregnant women with GDM is at a moderate level，and caregivers should pay more attention in the future to pregnant women with GDM who have low literacy，low income and low frequency of participation in GDM-related learning.

Key words: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus, Risk Perception, Scale, Reliability and Validity, Nursing Assessment, Blood Glucose Management

陈钰妹, 赵惠芬, 赵晓珊, 赵梅晶, 彭玉美, 沈丽琴. 妊娠期糖尿病孕妇风险感知量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2024, 59(6): 677-684.

CHEN Yumei, ZHAO Huifen, ZHAO Xiaoshan, ZHAO Meijing, PENG Yumei, SHEN Liqin. Development and reliability and validity test of a risk perception scale for pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2024, 59(6): 677-684.

图/表 1

参考文献 24

[1]	谢幸, 孔北华, 段涛. 妇产科学[M]. 9版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2018.
	Xie X, Kong BH, Duan T. Obstetrics and gynecology[M]. 9th ed. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House, 2018.
[2]	Gao CH, Sun X, Lu L, et al. Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in mainland China:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Diabetes Investig, 2019, 10(1):154-162. DOI URL
[3]	周英凤, 黄娜, 李丽, 等. 基于保护动机理论的妊娠期糖尿病孕妇血糖管理决策行为模型的构建[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2023, 58(4):433-439. DOI
	Zhou YF, Huang N, Li L, et al. Construction of blood glucose management decision-making behavior model in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus based on protective motivation theory[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2023, 58(4):433-439.
[4]	Kolivand M, Rahimi MA, Keramat A, et al. Effect of a new self-care guide package on maternal and neonatal outcomes in gestational diabetes:a randomized control trial[J]. J Diabetes, 2019, 11(2):139-147. DOI PMID
[5]	黄杭珍, 陆金. 妊娠期糖尿病患者自我管理现状调查及对母婴结局的影响[J]. 中国妇幼保健, 2021, 36(3):647-649.
	Huang HZ, Lu J. Investigation on self-management status of patients with gestational diabetes mellitus and the impact on maternal and infantile outcomes[J]. Matern Child Health Care China, 2021, 36(3):647-649.
[6]	Lennon SL. Risk perception in pregnancy:a concept analysis[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2016, 72(9):2016-2029. DOI URL
[7]	方蕾. 慢性病病人风险感知问卷的编制及其影响因素研究[D]. 西安: 第四军医大学, 2015.
	Fang L. Development of risk perception questionnaire for patients with chronic diseases and its influencing factors[D]. Xi’an: The Fourth Military Medical University, 2015.
[8]	Karavasileiadou S, Almegwely W, Alanazi A, et al. Self-management and self-efficacy of women with gestational diabetes mellitus:a systematic review[J]. Glob Health Action, 2022, 15(1):2087298. DOI URL
[9]	Becker GS. A theory of social interactions[J]. J Polit Econ, 1974, 82(6):1063-1093. DOI URL
[10]	Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis[J]. Qual Health Res, 2005, 15(9):1277-1288. DOI URL
[11]	杨艳, 魏碧蓉, 郭胜斌, 等. 妊娠期糖尿病孕妇社会资源支持量表的研制及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(12):1499-1506. DOI
	Yang Y, Wei BR, Guo SB, et al. Development of a social resource support scale for pregnant women with gestational diabetes and its test of validity and reliability[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(12):1499-1506. DOI
[12]	陈怡杨. 基于微信的终末期癌症患者照顾者需求支持方案的构建及效果研究[D]. 郑州: 郑州大学, 2021.
	Chen YY. Construction and effect research of demand support scheme for caregivers of terminal cancer patients based on WeChat[D]. Zhengzhou: Zhengzhou University, 2021.
[13]	王苏敏. 下肢静脉曲张患者术后自我管理能力量表的编制及临床应用[D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2021.
	Wang SM. Development and clinical application of postoperative self-management ability scale for patients with varicose veins of lower limbs[D]. Nanchang: Nanchang University, 2021.
[14]	高兴莲, 郭莉. 术中获得性压力性损伤危险因素评估量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(4):556-560. DOI
	Gao XL, Guo L. Development and reliability and validity test of the Risk Factor Assessment Scale for Intraoperative Acquired Pressure Injury[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2021, 56(4):556-560. DOI
[15]	吴明隆. 问卷统计分析实务:SPSS操作与应用[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2010.
	Wu ML. Practice of questionnaire statistical analysis:SPSS operation and application[M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press, 2010.
[16]	魏文双, 李沁梅, 张敏, 等. 基于保护动机理论的结直肠癌筛查问卷的编制及信效度检验[J]. 解放军护理杂志, 2021, 38(5):29-32.
	Wei WS, Li QM, Zhang M, et al. Construction of colorectal cancer screening questionnaire based on protection motivation theory and its validity and reliability study[J]. Nurs J Chin PLA, 2021, 38(5):29-32.
[17]	张晨, 周云仙. 我国护理测量工具文献中内容效度指数应用误区分析[J]. 护理学杂志, 2020, 35(4):86-88,92.
	Zhang C, Zhou YX. Analysis on errors regarding content validity index used in evaluation of measurement tools in Chinese nursing literature[J]. J Nurs Sci, 2020, 35(4):86-88,92.
[18]	孙振球, 徐勇勇. 医学统计学[M]. 4版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2014.
	Sun ZQ, Xu YY. Medical statistics[M]. 4th ed. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House, 2014.
[19]	马文军, 潘波. 问卷的信度和效度以及如何用SAS软件分析[J]. 中国卫生统计, 2000, 17(6):364-365.
	Ma WJ, Pan B. Reliability and validity of the questionnaire and how to analyze it with SAS software[J]. Chin J Health Stat, 2000, 17(6):364-365.
[20]	吴明隆. 结构方程模型:AMOS的操作与应用[M]. 2版. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2010.
	Wu ML. Structural equation model:operation and application of AMOS[M]. 2nd ed. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press, 2010.
[21]	陈维, 黄程琰, 毛天欣, 等. 多维测评工具聚敛和区分效度的SEM分析:以领悟社会支持量表为例[J]. 西南师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 41(2):136-140.
	Chen W, Huang CY, Mao TX, et al. On analysis of convergent and discriminant validity of multidimensional measurement tools with the Perceived Social Support Scale as an example[J]. J Southwest China Norm Univ Nat Sci Ed, 2016, 41(2):136-140.
[22]	罗伯特·F 德威利斯. 量表编制:理论与应用[M]. 3版. 席仲恩,杜珏译. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2016.
	Robert FD. Scale development[M]. 3rd ed. Xi ZE,Du J translate. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press, 2016.
[23]	王芳, 袁丽, 李饶, 等. 住院2型糖尿病患者自我管理行为现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学杂志, 2015, 30(17):29-31.
	Wang F, Yuan L, Li R, et al. The current situation and influencing factors of self-management among type 2 diabetes patients[J]. J Nurs Sci, 2015, 30(17):29-31.
[24]	王丽娜, 李莎莎. 结构方程模型在修正和中介作用分析中的误区和对策[J]. 中国卫生统计, 2017, 34(2):361-363.
	Wang LN, Li SS. Misunderstandings and countermeasures of structural equation model in modification and intermediary analysis[J]. Chin J Health Stat, 2017, 34(2):361-363.