中文版專業性生產支持知覺量表之信效度檢測

背景：護理人員是生產支持主要提供者，其專業能力深深影響母嬰結果和分娩經驗。台灣版生產支持量表對評價護理人員專業面能力的評估項目較缺乏。本研究目的以中文版專業性生產支持知覺量表應用於台灣產婦做信效度測試。方法：以回譯法進行量表中文化，採用內容效度包括專家效度、表面效度和前驅試驗初稿建構，且於中部某醫學中心婦產科病房以方便取樣收集240 位產婦之問卷資料，經建構效度包括項目分析和探索性因素分析、同時效度、內在一致性(Cronbach's α) 及再測信度(Pearson's γ)等檢測量表信效度。結果：有效問卷240 份 ( 回收率97.6%)。統計結果，刪除不適當項目，總量表減為32 項之修正量表，經探索性因素分析萃取5 個因素，分別命名為護理專業面能力、關注需求、信息溝通、促進舒適、傳達關懷，解釋變異量64.27%。以整體護理支持量表進行修正量表之同時效度，結果呈現顯著相關(r = .69, p ＜ .01) ，且具有良好之內在一致性Cronbach's α 為 .95 及再測信度為 .88。結論：修正後之中文版專業性生產支持知覺量表具有良好信效度，適用於台灣產婦之研究。量表含護理人員之專業面能力項目，完善檢測產婦對護理人員提供生產支持看法，為值得推廣量表。

關鍵字

生產支持；信效度測試

並列摘要

Background: Nurses are the primary providers of labor support. Their professional competence can affect outcomes for mothers and babies, as well as the birth experience. The nurse's professional competence was not fully evaluated by the Taiwanese version labor support scale. The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Chinese Version Perceived Professional Labor Support Tool, for Taiwanese women. Methods: The Chinese Version Perceived Professional Labor Support Tool was developed through back translation. The construct of the first draft was established by using content validity, including expert validity, face validity, and pilot study. A convenient sample of 240 postpartum women at the Central Medical Center maternity ward in Taiwan were recruited. Data were collected by questionnaires survey. The construct validity, including item analysis and exploratory factor analysis, concurrent validity, internal consistency (Cronbach's α), and test-retest reliability (Pearson's r), was used to determine the reliability and validity of the scale. Results: A total of 240 postpartum women completed the questionnaire survey (valid response rate: 97.6%). According to the statistical results, we removed inappropriate items, the total scale was reduced to 32 items, the factor analysis identified 32 items in 5 factors including the nurse's professional competence, concern needs, information communication, promoting comfort, and convey caring. These factors explained 64.27% of the total variance. Finally, the concurrent validity (r = .69, p ＜ .01) was established for the revised scale, and it revealed good internal consistency (α= .95) and test-retest reliability (r = .88). Conclusions: The revised Chinese Version Perceived Professional Labor Support Tool has good reliability and validity, and it can be applied for Taiwanese women. Furthermore, the scale, which includes the nurse's professional competence items, can evaluate a woman's perceptions toward the labor support that she receives during labor.