The Thai version of Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric (T-LCJR): Psychometric Properties
แบบวัดการตัดสินทางคลินิกของลาซาเตอร์ฉบับภาษาไทย:คุณภาพ ของเครื่องมือ
Keywords:
Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Reliability, Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR)Abstract
ABSTRACT
The clinical judgment skill of nurses can affect many patient outcomes, and therefore nursing students should develop their clinical judgment abilities. The evaluation of clinical judgment requires standardized instruments. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) is widely accepted and used to evaluate clinical judgment; however, the Thai version was not available at the time this report was prepared. Aim This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Thai version of the LCJR (T-LCJR). Design, Participants and Setting A cross-sectional descriptive studies was used to validate the Thai version of the LCJR (T-LCJR) in three colleges of nursing under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Public Health in Thailand. A translation and psychometric validation study was used with 220 undergraduate nursing students in the simulation laboratories and clinical settings.
Methods A back translation method was performed in the process of translation. All participants completed the high-fidelity simulation coursework as well as the regular clinical rotation on maternal and infant child nursing and midwifery practicum course II. Students then evaluated their clinical judgment from their simulation performance using the Thai version of the LCJR (T-LCJR).
Results The reliability using Cronbach's alpha was acceptable, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of between 0.653 and 0.775. The overall internal consistency reliability coefficient was 0.881. The confirmatory factor analysis with 4 components fitted the data well. The fit of the model was satisfactory in all indices, with a χ2/df value of 1.45, χ2 46.44, df 32, p 0.755, GFI 0.96, NFI 0.97 RMR 0.024 and RMSEA 0.032.
Conclusions Thai version of the LCJR (T-LCJR) showed satisfactory psychometric properties as to those of the original version. The T-LCJR and can be used to evaluate clinical judgment among Thai nursing students.Keywords: confirmatory factor analysis, reliability, Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR)
References
1. Lapkin S, Levett-Jones T, Bellchambers H, Fernandez R. Effectiveness of Patient Simulation Manikins in Teaching Clinical Reasoning Skills to Undergraduate Nursing Students: a Systematic Review. Clin Simul Nurs [Internet]. 2010; 6(6):e207–22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.05.005
2. Purling A, King LA. Literature Review: Graduate Nurses' Preparedness for Recognizing and Responding to the Deteriorating Patient. J Clin Nurs. 2012; 21:3451–65.
3. Tomlinson J. Using Clinical Supervision to Improve the Quality and Safety of Patient Care: a Response to Berwick and Francis. BMC Med Educ. 2015; xx:yy–zz.
4. Tanner CA. Thinking Like a nurse: a Research Based Model of Clinical Judgment in Nursing. J Nurs Educ. 2006; 45(6):204-11.
5. Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Airasian PW, Cruikshank KA, Mayer RE, Pintrich PR, et al. A Taxonomy for learning, Teaching, and Assessing: a Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives New York, NY: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon; 2001.
6. Banning M. Clinical Reasoning and its Application to Nursing: Concepts and Research Studies. Nurse Educ Pract. 2008; 8(3):177–83.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2007.06.0049
7. Benner PE. From Novice to Expert: Excellence and Power in Clinical Nursing Practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley; 1984.
8. Kardong-Edgren S, Adamson KA, Fitzgerald C. A Review of Currently published Evaluation Instruments for Human Patient Simulation. Clin Simul Nursing. 2010; 6:e25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2009.08.004
9. Lasater K. Clinical judgment: the Last Frontier for Evaluation. Nurs Educ Pract. 2011; 11(2):86–92.
10. Lasater K. Clinical judgment Development: using Simulation to Create an Assessment Rubric. J Nurs Educ. 2007; 46 (11):496-503
11. Miraglia R, Asselin ME. The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric as a Framework to Enhance Clinical Judgment in Novice and Experienced Nurses. J Nurses Prof Dev [Internet]. 2015[cited 2016 Oct 02]; 31(5): 284-91.
12. Yang F, Wang Y, Yang C, Zhou MH, Shu J, Fu B, Hu H. Improving Clinical Judgment by Simulation: a Randomized Trial and Validation of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in Chinese. BMC Med Educ. 2019 Jan 14; 19(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1454-9.
13. Shin H, Park CG, Shim K. The Korean Version of the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric: A Validation Study. Nurse Educ Today. 2015; 35(1):68-72.
14. Adamson KA, Kardong-Edgren S, Willhaus J. An Updated Review of Published Simulation Evaluation Instruments. Clin Simul Nurs. 2013; 9(9):393-400.
15. Brislin RW. The Wording and Translation of Research Instrument. In W. J. Lonner & J. W.Berry, editors. Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1986. P. 137-64.
16. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2010
17. Beaton D, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, & Ferraz MB. Recommendations for the Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Health Status Measures. Toronto, Canada: Institute for Work and Health. 2007 Retrieved from http://www.dash.iwh.on.ca/sites/dash/files/downloads/cross
cultural_adaptation_2007.pdf
18. Manetti W. Sound Clinical Judgment in Nursing: A Concept Analysis. Nurs Forum. 2019; 54(1): 102-110
19. Simmons, B. Clinical Reasoning: Concept Analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2010; 66(5): 1151‐ 1158.
20. Victor‐Chmil, J. Critical Thinking Versus Clinical Reasoning Versus Clinical Judgment: Differential Diagnosis. Nurs Educ. 2013; 38(1): 34‐ 36.
21. Cohen R, Swerdlik M. Psychological Testing and Assessment. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2010
22. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making Sense of Cronbach′s Alpha. Int J Med Educ 2011; 2:53-
23. Bland J, Altman D. Statistics Notes: Cronbach's alpha. BMJ. 1997; 314:275.
