Development and validation of Dutch version of Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in hospital practice: An instrument design study

被引:18
|
作者
Vreugdenhil, Jettie [1 ]
Spek, Bea [2 ]
机构
[1] Amstel Acad VU Med Ctr, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol Biostat & Bioinformat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Nursing students; Hospital traineeship; Clinical reasoning; Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric; Psychometric properties; NURSING-STUDENTS; CRITICAL-CARE; SIMULATION; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; NURSES;
D O I
10.1016/j.nedt.2017.12.013
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background: Clinical reasoning in patient care is a skill that cannot be observed directly. So far, no reliable, valid instrument exists for the assessment of nursing students' clinical reasoning skills in hospital practice. Lasater's clinical judgment rubric (LCJR), based on "Tanner's model "Thinking like a nurse" has been tested, mainly in academic simulation settings. Objectives: The aim is to develop a Dutch version of the LCJR (D-LCJR) and to test its psychometric properties when used in a hospital traineeship context. Design: A mixed-model approach was used to develop and to validate the instrument. Setting: Ten dedicated educational units in a university hospital. Participants: A well-mixed group of 52 nursing students, nurse coaches and nurse educators. Methods: A Delphi panel developed the D-LCJR. Students' clinical reasoning skills were assessed "live" by nurse coaches, nurse educators and students who rated themselves. The psychometric properties tested during the assessment process are reliability, reproducibility, content validity and construct validity by testing two hypothesis: 1) a positive correlation between assessed and self-reported sum scores (convergent validity) and 2) a linear relation between experience and sum score (clinical validity). Results: The obtained D-LCJR was found to be internally consistent, Cronbach's alpha 0.93. The rubric is also reproducible with intraclass correlations between 0.69 and 0.78. Experts judged it to be content valid. The two hypothesis were both tested significant, supporting evidence for construct validity. Conclusion: The translated and modified LCJR, is a promising tool for the evaluation of nursing students' development in clinical reasoning in hospital traineeships, by students, nurse coaches and nurse educators. More evidence on construct validity is necessary, in particular for students at the end of their hospital traineeship. Based on our research, the D-LCJR applied in hospital traineeships is a usable and reliable tool.
引用
收藏
页码:43 / 51
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Korean version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric: A validation study
    Shin, Hyunsook
    Park, Chang Gi
    Shim, Kaka
    [J]. NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2015, 35 (01) : 68 - 72
  • [2] Transcultural Translation and Validation of Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric©
    Duarte, Hugo Miguel Santos
    Lasater, Kathie
    Dixe, Maria dos Anjos Coelho Rodrigues
    [J]. REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE ENFERMAGEM, 2022, 75 (06)
  • [3] Reliability and validity of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric - Brazilian Version
    Ramalho Vasconcelos Morais, Sheila Coelho
    Perbone Nunes, Janaina Gomes
    Lasater, Kathie
    Bottura Leite de Barros, Alba Lucia
    de Carvalho, Emilia Campos
    [J]. ACTA PAULISTA DE ENFERMAGEM, 2018, 31 (03) : 265 - 271
  • [4] Psychometric properties of the virtual patient version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric
    Georg, Carina
    Welin, Elisabet
    Jirwe, Maria
    Karlgren, Klas
    Ulfvarson, Johanna
    [J]. NURSE EDUCATION IN PRACTICE, 2019, 38 : 14 - 20
  • [5] Improving clinical judgment by simulation: a randomized trial and validation of the Lasater clinical judgment rubric in Chinese
    Fen Yang
    Yuncui Wang
    Chongming Yang
    M Huifang Zhou
    Jing Shu
    Bei Fu
    Hui Hu
    [J]. BMC Medical Education, 19
  • [6] Improving clinical judgment by simulation: a randomized trial and validation of the Lasater clinical judgment rubric in Chinese
    Yang, Fen
    Wang, Yuncui
    Yang, Chongming
    Zhou, M. Huifang
    Shu, Jing
    Fu, Bei
    Hu, Hui
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2019, 19 (1)
  • [7] The implementation of Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model and the Indonesian version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in the clinical setting
    Manik, Marisa Junianti
    Callaway, Penny
    [J]. APPLIED NURSING RESEARCH, 2023, 73
  • [8] Cultural adaptation and validation of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in nursing students in Spain
    Roman-Cereto, Montserrat
    Garcia-Mayor, Silvia
    Kaknani-Uttumchandani, Shakira
    Garcia-Gamez, Marina
    Leon-Campos, Alvaro
    Fernandez-Ordonez, Eloisa
    Luisa Ruiz-Garcia, Maria
    Marti-Garcia, C.
    Lopez-Leiva, Inmaculada
    Lasater, Kathie
    Miguel Morales-Asencio, Jose
    [J]. NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2018, 64 : 71 - 78
  • [9] Internal Reliability Estimates of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric Among New-to-Practice Nurses in a Simulated Setting
    Cantrell, Mary Ann
    Mariani, Bette
    Lengetti, Evelyn
    [J]. NURSING EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES, 2021, 42 (06) : E49 - E51
  • [10] The role of patients' experiences in the Dutch health care system: validation and discriminative ability of the Dutch version of the hospital CAHPS instrument
    Rupp, I
    Arah, OA
    Poll, A
    Stam, PJA
    Schmidt, P
    Vriens, BL
    Klazinga, NS
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2005, 15 : 18 - 19