The Turkish version of the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES): Validity and reliability study.

This study was conducted to adapt the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES) into Turkish and to verify its validity and reliability. This study was conducted on 314 nurses in Türkiye between November 2023 and February 2024 to test the psychometric properties of OASES. The instrument consists of 20 items clustered into six domains. The cultural adaptation process was carried out according to the International Testing Commission guidelines: Turkish translation, expert panel, content validity, translation back to English, preliminary study and the final version of the instrument. To check the validity of the multiple-choice test, item difficulty and discriminating index were analysed. The reliability of the instrument was evaluated to the retest 14 days after the first test. Scale level content validity by 11 experts in wound care was 0,97 (I-CVI = 0.8-1.0). In the item analysed of the OASES, the item difficulty index was 0,51 (p-value = 0.34-0.76) and the discriminating index was 0.40 (D-value = 0.26-0.51). The 2-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient of the overall instrument was 0.90 (95% CI = 0.79-0.95). The Turkish version of OASES is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to evaluate nurses' knowledge levels regarding skin tears with acceptable psychometric properties. It can be applied in nursing education, research and practice to evaluate the knowledge of Turkish speaking nurses about skin tears.

Yüceler Kaçmaz H ，Karadağ A ，Akutay S ，Çobanoğlu Aktan D ... -  《-》

Development and psychometric property testing of a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) in 37 countries.

To develop and psychometrically evaluate a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES). Prospective psychometric instrument validation study. The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument was developed based on a literature review and expert input (N = 19). Face and content validity were assessed in a two-round Delphi procedure by 10 international experts affiliated with the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP). The instrument was psychometrically tested in a convenience sample of 387 nurses in 37 countries (April-May 2020). Validity of the multiple-choice test items (item difficulty, discriminating index, quality of the response alternatives), construct validity, and test-retest reliability (stability) were analysed and evaluated in light of international reference standards. A 20-item instrument, covering six knowledge domains most relevant to skin tears, was designed. Content validity was established (CVI = 0.90-1.00). Item difficulty varied between 0.24 and 0.94 and the quality of the response alternatives between 0.01-0.52. The discriminating index was acceptable (0.19-0.77). Participants with a theoretically expected higher knowledge level had a significantly higher total score than participants with theoretically expected lower knowledge (p < .001). The 1-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.78-0.86) for the full instrument and varied between 0.72 (95% CI = 0.64-0.79) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.81-0.89) for the domains. Cohen's Kappa coefficients of the individual items ranged between 0.21 and 0.74. The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument is supported by acceptable psychometric properties and can be applied in nursing education, research, and practice to assess knowledge of healthcare professionals about skin tears. Prevention and treatment of skin tears are a challenge for healthcare professionals. The provision of adequate care is based on profound and up-to-date knowledge. None of the existing instruments to assess skin tear knowledge is psychometrically tested, nor up-to-date. OASES can be used worldwide to identify education, practice, and research needs and priorities related to skin tears in clinical practice.

Van Tiggelen H ，Alves P ，Ayello E ，Bååth C ，Baranoski S ，Campbell K ，Dunk AM ，Gloeckner M ，Hevia H ，Holloway S ，Idensohn P ，Karadağ A ，Langemo D ，LeBlanc K ，Ousey K ，Pokorná A ，Romanelli M ，Santos VLCG ，Smet S ，Williams A ，Woo K ，Van Hecke A ，Verhaeghe S ，Beeckman D ... -  《-》

The Chinese version of the skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES): Cultural adaptation and validation.

Skin tear knowledge is an important predictor of the decreased incidence and management of skin tears, and the knowledge level among Chinese nurses is unknown so far. A validated instrument for measuring skin tear knowledge is urgent. To culturally adapt the skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) into Chinese and verify its validity and reliability in the Chinese context. The cultural adaptation process for OASES into Chinese was established on Beaton's translation model. Content validity was determined by the 8-expert group in wound care. A nationwide psychometric validation study was performed on a convenience sample of 3333 nurses from 113 tertiary hospitals, of whom 98 nurses finished the test-retest procedure for reliability analysis. Item validity (item difficulty and discriminating index) and construct validity (known-groups technique) were tested. The content validity index was 0.88-1.00. The item validity was as follows: Item difficulty ranged from 0.16 to 0.86, with an average value of 0.52; the discriminating index varied between 0.05 and 0.61. The known-group technique demonstrated excellent construct validity with a significant difference between predefined groups with theoretically expected higher knowledge scores and theoretically expected lower knowledge scores (P < 0.001). For the test-retest reliability, the Intraclass correction coefficient (ICC) during a 14-day interval for the overall tool was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.71-0.86), and Cohen's kappa value for each item varied from 0.17 to 0.62. The Chinese version of OASES was validated to be suitable for skin tear knowledge assessment with acceptable psychometric properties, through which the knowledge and training priorities of skin tear among Chinese nurses can be quantified.

Feng L ，Hu C ，Li J ，Ying Y ，Chen L ，Wei H ，Liang H ，Hu H ... -  《Journal of Tissue Viability》

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the pressure injury knowledge assessment tool 2.0.

The aim of this study was to develop a Turkish version of the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Assessment Tool 2.0 (PUKAT 2.0) and determine its validity and reliability. This was a cross-cultural adaptation and validation study. The study sample included a total of 451 participants (232 nurses and 219 nursing students). The validity of the Turkish version of the PUKAT 2.0 was evaluated with linguistic validity, content validity, item validity (item difficulty, discriminating index), and construct validity (known-groups technique) analyses. The reliability of the tool was evaluated by conducting a test-retest analysis. Content validity index (CVI) for the items (Item-CVI) ranged from 0.83 to 1.00 and the CVI for the scale (Scale-CVI) was 0.95. The difficulty index for 21 items ranged from 0.10 to 0.63. Four items were found to be too difficult. Item discriminating index values ranged from 0.00 to 0.61. The overall intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was found to be 0.80. The Turkish version of the Pressure Injury Knowledge Assessment Tool 2.0 (PIKAT 2.0-Tr) is supported by acceptable psychometric properties and can be used to evaluate the knowledge of nurses and nursing students in Turkey about the prevention of PI.

Ursavaş FE ，Bayrak D 《-》

Translation and validation: standard Chinese version of the skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES).

Skin tears (STs) are acute cutaneous trauma and have become an increasingly common global health problem. International studies have shown barriers to the prevention and management of ST and the relevance of the role of nurses in implementation. The purpose of this study was to adapt an existing tool to measure nurses' knowledge of the prevention, assessment, and management of STs. Skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) is a knowledge survey tool for skin lacerations developed by Van Tiggelen et al. in 2020. The standard Chinese version of OASES was formed by translating and cross-cultural adaption of source tools following Brislin's translation model, and content validity and translation quality were determined by Delphi method. A psychometric assessment of 341 nurses was then performed to assess item difficulty, discrimination, and quality of response selection in the standard Chinese version of OASES. In addition, construct validity was established by test-retest procedures and known-group techniques. The standard Chinese version had good content validity and moderate difficulty. It was found that the discrimination was very good: all groups with higher professional level (theoretically expected) scored significantly higher than those with lower professional level (theoretically expected). The stability of the tool was sufficient. The standard Chinese version of OASES exhibits good psychometric properties and can be used and disseminated to nurses in a Chinese cultural context to assess knowledge about STs. However, it should be noted that the tool was only validated with nurses in cancer hospitals.

Luo B ，Liu J ，Chen W ，Ge Y ，Huang L ，Huang Z ... -  《-》