Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Oct;79(10):4058-4073.
doi: 10.1111/jan.15714. Epub 2023 May 24.

Development and psychometric validation of the hospitalized older adults' dignity scale for measuring dignity during acute hospitalization

Affiliations

Development and psychometric validation of the hospitalized older adults' dignity scale for measuring dignity during acute hospitalization

Abdul-Ganiyu Fuseini et al. J Adv Nurs. 2023 Oct.

Abstract

Aim: To develop and validate a culturally appropriate patient-reported outcome measure for measuring dignity for older adults during acute hospitalization.

Design: A three-phased exploratory sequential mixed-method design was used.

Methods: Domains were identified and items were generated from findings of a recent qualitative study, two systematic reviews and grey literature. Content validity evaluation and pre-testing were undertaken using standard instrument development techniques. Two-hundred and seventy hospitalized older adults were surveyed to test construct and convergent validity, internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability of the measure. Analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 25. The STROBE checklist was used to document reporting of the study.

Results: We established the 15-item Hospitalized Older Adults' Dignity Scale (HOADS) that has a 5-factor structure: shared decision-making (3 items); healthcare professional-patient communication (3 items); patient autonomy (4 items); patient privacy (2 items); respectful care (3 items). Excellent content validity, adequate construct and convergent validity, acceptable internal consistency reliability and good test-retest reliability were demonstrated.

Conclusion: We established the HOADS is a valid and reliable scale to measure dignity for older adults during acute hospitalization. Future studies using confirmatory factor analysis are needed to corroborate the dimensionality of the factor structure and external validity of the scale. Routine use of the scale may inform the development of strategies to improve dignity-related care in the future.

Impact: The development and validation of the HOADS will provide nurses and other healthcare professionals with a feasible and reliable scale for measuring older adults' dignity during acute hospitalization. The HOADS advances the conceptual understanding of dignity in hospitalized older adults by including additional constructs that have not been captured in previous dignity-related measures for older adults (i.e. shared decision-making and respectful care). The factor structure of the HOADS, therefore, includes five domains of dignity and offers a new opportunity for nurses and other healthcare professionals to better understand the nuances of dignity for older adults during acute hospitalization. For example, the HOADS enables nurses to identify differences in levels of dignity based on contextual factors and to use this information to guide the implementation of strategies that promote dignified care.

Patient or public contribution: Patients were involved in the generation of items for the scale. Their perspectives and the perspectives of experts were sought in determining the relevance of each item of the scale to patients' dignity.

Keywords: acute care; dignified care; dignity; hospitalization; older adults; patients; scale development and validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

References

REFERENCES

    1. Abma, I. L., Rovers, M., & van der Wees, P. J. (2016). Appraising convergent validity of patient-reported outcome measures in systematic reviews: Constructing hypotheses and interpreting outcomes. BMC Research Notes, 9(1), 226. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2034-2
    1. Addai, I., Opoku-Agyeman, C., & Amanfu, S. K. (2014). Exploring predictors of subjective well-being in Ghana: A micro-level study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(4), 869-890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9454-7
    1. Agyemang-Duah, W., Peprah, C., & Peprah, P. (2019). Barriers to formal healthcare utilisation among poor older people under the livelihood empowerment against poverty programme in the Atwima Nwabiagya district of Ghana. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 1185. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7437-2
    1. Allard, E., Legault, A., & Genest, C. (2018). Dignity or dignities? When a concept has multiple meanings. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 56(2), e1-e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2018.04.008
    1. Asamani, J. A., Chebere, M. M., Barton, P. M., D'Almeida, S. A., Odame, E. A., & Oppong, R. (2018). Forecast of healthcare facilities and health workforce requirements for the public sector in Ghana, 2016-2026. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 7(11), 1040-1052. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2018.64

LinkOut - more resources