Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral
Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional

ÜSTÜN, Gonca

doi:10.14744/phd.2021.34603

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional

Gonca Üstün (Amasya Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Anabilim Dalı, Amasya, Türkiye)

Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi

11 4

Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 67 - 75 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.14744/phd.2021.34603 İndeks Tarihi: 27-06-2022

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional

Öz:

Objectives: This study was carried out to examine the validity and reliability of a Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale-Healthcare Professional (MISS-HP). Methods: This methodological study was performed with 125 nurses working in hospitals in Turkey in March-April 2021 using online forms. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and IBM SPSS AMOS Version 21.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) were used to perform the analysis. Results: The linguistic validity of the MISS-HP was assessed using the translation-back translation technique and ex- pert opinions. The sample size was found to be sufficient and suitable for factor analysis (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin=0.888, chi- squared=1067.959, degrees of freedom [DF]=45, p=0.000). A 3-factor structure with 10 items was determined, and the factor load of the items ranged from 0.84 to 0.94. The fit index values were acceptable and within the limits of perfect agreement (minimum discrepancy/DF [CMIN/DF]=1.712, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA]=0.076, stan- dardized root mean squared residual [SRMR]=0.045, adjusted goodness-of-fit index [AGFI]=0.856, goodness-of-fit index [GFI]=0.916, Tucker-Lewis index [TLI]=0.970, relative fit index [RFI]=0.930, incremental fit index [IFI]=0.979, normed fit index [NFI]=0.950, comparative fit index [CFI]=0.978). Average variance extracted values >0.50 and composite reliability values >0.70 for each factor confirmed convergent and divergent validity of the scale. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.91 and the split-half reliability coefficient was 0.95. There was a statistically significant, moderate, positive correlation was seen between the Compassion Fatigue-Short Scale (CF-SS) and the MISS-HP scores (r=0.446, p=0.000). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the MISS-HP is a valid and reliable instrument to evaluate moral injury in healthcare professionals

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Shay J. Moral injury. Psychoanal Psychol 2014;31:182–91.
2. Antonelli M. Moral injury. Am J Psychoanal 2017;77:406–16.
3. Hall NA, Everson AT, Billingsley MR, Miller MB. Moral injury, mental health and behavioural health outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2021.
4. Koenig HG, Youssef NA, Pearce M. Assessment of moral injury in veterans and active duty military personnel with PTSD: A review. Front Psychiatry 2019;10:443.
5. Mantri S, Lawson JM, Wang Z, Koenig HG. Identifying moral injury in healthcare professionals: The moral injury symptom scale-HP. J Relig Health 2020;59:2323–40.
6. Xiang YT, Yang Y, Li W, Zhang L, Zhang Q, Cheung T, et al. Timely mental health care for the 2019 novel coronavirus out- break is urgently needed. Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7:228–9.
7. Williamson V, Murphy D, Greenberg N. COVID-19 and expe- riences of moral injury in front-line key workers. Occup Med (Lond) 2020;70:317–9.
8. Greenberg N, Docherty M, Gnanapragasam S, Wessely S. Managing mental health challenges faced by healthcare workers during covid-19 pandemic. BMJ 2020;368:m1211.
9. White DB, Lo B. A framework for rationing ventilators and critical care beds during the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA 2020;323:1773–4.
10. Tracy DK, Tarn M, Eldridge R, Cooke J, Calder JDF, Greenberg N. What should be done to support the mental health of healthcare staff treating COVID-19 patients? Br J Psychiatry 2020;217:537–9.
11. Hines SE, Chin KH, Glick DR, Wickwire EM. Trends in moral in- jury, distress, and resilience factors among healthcare workers at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18:488.
12. Borges LM, Barnes SM, Farnsworth JK, Bahraini NH, Bren- ner LA. A commentary on moral injury among health care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol Trauma 2020;12:S138–40.
13. Zuzelo PR. Making do during a pandemic: Morally distressing and injurious events. Holist Nurs Pract 2020;34:259–61.
14. Williamson V, Stevelink SAM, Greenberg N. Occupational moral injury and mental health: Systematic review and meta- analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2018;212:339–46.
15. Koenig HG, Ames D, Youssef NA, Oliver JP, Volk F, Teng EJ, et al. The moral injury symptom scale-military version. J Relig Health 2018;57:249–65.
16. Zhizhong W, Koenig HG, Yan T, Jing W, Mu S, Hongyu L, et al. Psychometric properties of the moral injury symptom scale among Chinese health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Psychiatry 2020;20:556.
17. Karakoç FY, Dönmez L. Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası 2014;40:39–49.
18. Dinç S, Ekinci M. Turkish adaptation, validity and reliability of compassion fatigue short scale. Curr Approaches Psychiatry 2019;11:192–202.
19. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating pa- tient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:1–74.
20. Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res 1992;5:194–7.
21. Öner N. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlamasında bir yöntembilim modeli. Psikoloji Derg 1987;6:80–3.
22. Aksayan S, Gözüm S. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlaması için re- hber I: Ölçek uyarlama aşamaları ve dil uyarlaması. Hemşire- likte Araştırma Geliştirme Derg 2002;4:9–20.
23. Çapık C, Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Intercultural scale adaptation stages, language and culture adaptation: Updated guideline. Florence Nightingale J Nurs 2018;26:199–210.
24. Borsa JC, Damásio BF, Bandeira DR. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of psychological instruments: Some considera- tions. Paidéia 2012;22:423–32.
25. Erkuş A. Ölçek geliştirme ve uyarlama çalışmalarında karşılaşılan sorunlar. Türk Psikoloji Bülteni 2007;13:17–25.
26. Bayık ME, Gürbüz S. Methodological issues in scale adapta- tion: A study on adapted scales in the management and orga- nization field. İş İnsan Derg 2016;3:1–20.
27. Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlaması için re- hber II: Psikometrik özellikler ve kültürlerarası karşılaştırma. Hemşirelikte Araştırma Geliştirme Derg 2003;1:3–14.
28. Akgül A, Çevik O. İstatistiksel analiz teknikleri SPSS’te işletme yönetimi uygulamaları. Ankara: Emek Ofset; 2003.
29. Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu G, Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel uygulamaları. 2. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık; 2012.
30. Büyüköztürk Ş. Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yöne- timi 2002;32:470–83.
31. Orçan F. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Which one to use first? J Meas Eval Educ 2018;9:413–21.
32. Tavşancıl E. Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. 4. Baskı. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık; 2010.
33. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR. Structural equation model- ling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electron J Bus Res Methods 2008;6:53–60.
34. Simon D, Kriston L, Loh A, Spies C, Scheibler F, Wills C, et al. Confirmatory factor analysis and recommendations for im- provement of the autonomy-preference-index (API). Health Expect 2010;13:234–43.
35. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2009.
36. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:297–334.
37. Tezbaşaran A. Likert tipi ölçek geliştirme kılavuzu. 2. Baskı. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları; 1997.
38. Özbek ÖY. Ölçme araçlarında bulunması istenen nitelikler. In: Tekindal S, editör. Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. 6. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2010. s. 44–87.
39. Mantri S, Lawson JM, Wang Z, Koenig HG. Prevalence and pre- dictors of moral injury symptoms in health care professionals. J Nerv Ment Dis 2021;209:174–80.
40. Wang Z, Harold KG, Tong Y, Wen J, Sui M, Liu H, et al. Moral injury in Chinese health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol Trauma 2022;14:250–7.
41. Litam SDA, Balkin RS. Moral injury in health-care workers dur- ing Covid-19 pandemic. Traumatology 2021;27:14–9

APA	ÜSTÜN G (2022). Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. , 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
Chicago	ÜSTÜN Gonca Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. (2022): 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
MLA	ÜSTÜN Gonca Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. , 2022, ss.67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
AMA	ÜSTÜN G Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. . 2022; 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
Vancouver	ÜSTÜN G Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. . 2022; 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
IEEE	ÜSTÜN G "Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional." , ss.67 - 75, 2022. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
ISNAD	ÜSTÜN, Gonca. "Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional". (2022), 67-75. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2021.34603

APA	ÜSTÜN G (2022). Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi, 13(1), 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
Chicago	ÜSTÜN Gonca Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi 13, no.1 (2022): 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
MLA	ÜSTÜN Gonca Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi, vol.13, no.1, 2022, ss.67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
AMA	ÜSTÜN G Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi. 2022; 13(1): 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
Vancouver	ÜSTÜN G Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi. 2022; 13(1): 67 - 75. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
IEEE	ÜSTÜN G "Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional." Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi, 13, ss.67 - 75, 2022. 10.14744/phd.2021.34603
ISNAD	ÜSTÜN, Gonca. "Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale- Healthcare Professional". Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi 13/1 (2022), 67-75. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2021.34603