城市学龄前3-6岁儿童烧烫伤简易风险评估问卷研制

发布时间：2018-02-21 07:47

  本文关键词： 学龄前3-6岁儿童 烧烫伤 风险评估 信度 效度　出处：《中南大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：目的：编制城市学龄前3-6岁儿童烧烫伤简易风险评估问卷,评估其信度和效度,确定其风险评估标准。 方法：通过复习和总结烧烫伤流行病学调查、烧烫伤经典案例、风险评估量表,专题小组讨论,提出条目库。通过访谈法获取家长意见,专家会议讨论,确定了条目初稿。采用179名儿童进行预测试,经多种统计方法结果和专家意见,形成问卷正式版。采用分层整群抽样调查了长沙市6所幼儿园468名儿童,医院调查了50名烧烫伤阳性儿童。根据518名儿童调查结果,对问卷进行信度和效度评价,确定其风险评估标准。 结果：(1)学龄前儿童烧烫伤简易风险评估问卷最终版由15个条目构成,分为“防护不当”、“照顾不当”、“器材使用不当”和“洗澡处置不当”四个维度。 (2)信度检验结果显示：问卷各个维度和总的分半信度在0.706～0.759之间,Cronbach's a系数在0.638～0.773之间。 (3)效度检验结果显示：探索性因子分析得到4个因子,4因子的累积贡献率为57.69%。多特征／多条目相关分析显示每一条目与所属维度之间的相关系数介于0.493-0.879之间,与其他维度之间的相关系数介于0.033-0.475之间。各个维度间的相关系数在0.353～0.555之间(P0.05),各维度与总分的相关系数在0.630～0.828之间(P0.05)。各个维度的Cronbach's a系数均大于与其他维度间的相关系数,各个维度与总分的相关系数均大于各个维度间的相关系数。 验证性因子分析的比较拟合指数(CFI)、近似误差均方根(RMSEA)、规范拟合指数(NFI)、增值拟合指数(IFI)分别为0.070、0.887、0.856、0.889。效标效度比较结果显示烧烫伤组比非伤害组在总分和第1、2维度得分上均显著较高。 (4)518例儿童烧烫伤简易风险评估问卷平均得分为25.8。采用百分位数法确定风险得分评估标准为：≤21分为存在低度风险；21～28分存在中度风险；28分为存在高度风险。分布法确定最小显著改变值为5.10。 结论：本研究编制了城市学龄前3-6岁儿童烧烫伤简易风险评估问卷并制定了评估标准。问卷具有较好的信度和效度,可用于我国城市学龄前儿童烧烫伤风险评估。
[Abstract]:Objective: to develop a simple risk assessment questionnaire for burn and scalding in urban preschool children, to evaluate its reliability and validity, and to determine its risk assessment criteria. Methods: by reviewing and summarizing the epidemiological investigation of burn and scalding, the classic cases of burn and scalding, the risk assessment scale, the panel discussion, the item library. The first draft of the item was determined. 179 children were pre-tested. Through the results of various statistical methods and expert opinions, a formal version of the questionnaire was formed. 468 children in 6 kindergartens in Changsha were investigated by stratified cluster sampling. According to the results of 518 children, the reliability and validity of the questionnaire were evaluated and the risk assessment criteria were determined. Results the final version of the simple risk Assessment questionnaire for Burn and Burn of Preschool Children was composed of 15 items, which were divided into four dimensions: "improper protection", "improper care", "improper use of equipment" and "improper bath disposal". 2) the results of reliability test showed that the Cronbachsa coefficient of the questionnaire was between 0.706 and 0.759, and the coefficient of Cronbachsa was between 0.638 and 0.773. The result of validity test showed that the cumulative contribution rate of four factors was 57.69. The correlation coefficient between each item and its dimension was between 0.493-0.879, the correlation coefficient between each item and its dimension was between 0.493-0.879, the correlation coefficient between each item and its dimension was 0.493-0.879, the correlation coefficient between each item and its dimension was 0.493-0.879. The correlation coefficient between each dimension and other dimensions was between 0.033-0.475, the correlation coefficient between each dimension and total score was 0.353n0.555 and the correlation coefficient between each dimension and total score was 0.6300.828. The Cronbach's a coefficient of each dimension was higher than that of other dimensions. The correlation coefficient between each dimension and total score is larger than that between each dimension. The comparative fitting index of confirmatory factor analysis (CFI), approximate error mean square root (RMSEAA), standard fitting index (NFI) and increment fitting index (IFI) were 0.070 / 0.887 / 0.8560.89 respectively. The results of comparison of validity of efficacy scale showed that the total score and the 12nd dimension of burn and scald group were higher than that of non-injury group. The scores were significantly higher. The average score of simple risk assessment questionnaire of 518 children with burn and scald was 25.8.The risk score assessment criteria determined by percentile method were as follows: 鈮，

本文编号：1521410