VALIDATION OF AN INNOVATIVE INSTRUMENT FOR EVALUATING GOOD PRACTICES REGARDING THE USE OF MEDICAL GASES IN HOSPITALS
Validação de um instrumento inovador para avaliação de Boas práticas quanto ao uso de gases medicinais em hospitais
Palavras-chave:
Validação, Gases medicinais, Boas práticasResumo
Introdução: Os gases medicinais são utilizados no diagnóstico, cirurgia e tratamento preventivo de diversas doenças, como a COVID-19. Atualmente, não existem na literatura instrumentos que avaliem a adesão às boas práticas de uso de gases medicinais em ambiente hospitalar. Objetivo: Construir e validar um instrumento para avaliar a adesão às boas práticas quanto ao uso de gases medicinais em ambiente hospitalar. Métodos: O estudo de desenvolvimento metodológico e validação de conteúdo foi realizado no período de maio a novembro de 2018 e compreendeu três etapas distintas: (I) elaboração do instrumento de avaliação do cumprimento das boas práticas de uso de gases medicinais em ambiente hospitalar; (II) validação de conteúdo do instrumento pela técnica de grupo nominal; e (III) classificação de cada padrão com base nas categorias de desempenho e suas respectivas pontuações. Resultados: Foi elaborado um instrumento com 54 “padrões de conformidade”, dividido em dois domínios: estrutura (29) e processo (25). No teste de avaliação de aplicabilidade, o instrumento obteve 100% de concordância quanto à sua utilidade na prática hospitalar. Quatro categorias de desempenho foram definidas: satisfatório com excelência, satisfação, pouca satisfação e insatisfatório. Conclusão: O instrumento obteve avaliação satisfatória entre os especialistas quanto ao conteúdo, bem como a classificação de cada padrão de conformidade segundo criticidade, pontuação e categorias de desempenho. Dessa forma, foi gerado um instrumento pioneiro de acordo com protocolos nacionais e internacionais de avaliação de boas práticas quanto ao uso de gases medicinais em hospitais. O instrumento desenvolvido pode contribuir para a segurança do paciente e reduzir custos com saúde.
Downloads
Não há dados estatísticos.
Referências
1. Poitou P, Fouret C, Duffau E. Regulations on gases for medical use in France. Ann Pharm Fr. 2002;60(5):326–32.
2. Soni N, Maheshwari DG. Overview of regulatory requirements for medical gases and pharmaceutical gases. Inter Journal of Res in Pharm and Pharma Sciences. 2017;2(6): 61-64.
3. Luisetto M, Sahu RK. Hospital Medicine Gas Management System: The Pharmacist Role in a Pharmaceutical - Chemistry Setting-Results of a Practical Experience in an Advanced Country. Adv Bioeng Bio Sci Res. 2019;2(3):1–10.
4. Calligaro GL, Lallac U, Audleyd G, Gina P, Miller MG, Mendelson M et al. The utility of high-flow nasal oxygen for severe COVID-19 pneumonia in a resource-constrained setting: A multi-centre prospective observational study. E Clin Med. 2020;28:100570.
5. De-Juilio PA, Jenkins MB, Huml JP. Evaluation of Safety and Cost of an Open-Design Oxygen Mask in a Large Community Hospital. Resp care. 2018;63(4):412–416.
6. Sangiorgi E, Carati D, Mazzolani M, Mazzetti I, Fraticelli A. Safety Management of Medical Gas Plants in Healthcare Structures of the Emilia Romagna Region. Ital J of Clin Pharm, 2015.
7. Herve-Bazin M, Durand D, Cardona F, Maison P. Medication errors related to the administration of medicinal gases in France: one of the 12 french never events. Congreso de la Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé (ANSM). 2016.
8. Associação Portuguesa das Empresas Químicas - APEQ. Manual hospitalar: boas práticas de gestão de gases medicinais. 1ªed. Lisboa: APEQ; 2017. Portuguese.
9. Salah M, Osman H, Hosny O. Performance-Based Reliability-Centered Maintenance Planning for Hospital Facilities. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2018;32(1):1–7.
10. Gómez-Chaparro M, García-Sanz-Calcedo J, Márquez LA. Analytical Determination of Medical Gases Consumption and Their Impact on Hospital Sustainability. Sustainability. 2018;10(8):2948.
11. Kamran A, Chia E, Tobin, C. Acute oxygen therapy: an audit of prescribing and delivery practices in a tertiary hospital in Perth, Western Australia. Internal medicine jornal. 2018; 48(2):151–157.
12. Hatling D, Hogset A, Guttormsen AB, Müller B. Iatrogenic cerebral gas embolism: A systematic review of case reports. Acta Anaest Scand. 2019;63:154–160.
13. Gunathilake R, Lowe D, Wills J, Knight A, Braude P. Implementation of a multicomponent intervention to optimise patient safety through improved Oxygen prescription in a rural hospital. Aust. J. Rural Health. 2014;22:328–333.
14. Rioseco PS, Rodríguez NO, Skog SM, Rozas, EC, Sepúlveda AN. Auditoría de oxígenoterapia de pacientes hospitalizados en establecimientos del Servicio de Salud Talcahuano. Rev Chil Enferm Resp. 2017;33:91–98.
15. Salamano M, Palchik V, Botta C, Colautti M, Bianchi M, Traverso ML. Seguridad del paciente: aplicación de gestión de calidad para prevenir errores de medicación en el circuito de uso de medicamentos. Rev Calid Asist. 2013;28(1):28–35.
16. Lasomsri P, Yanbuaban P, Kerdpoca O, Ouypornkochagorn T. A Development of Low-Cost Devices for Monitoring Indoor Air Quality in a Large-Scale Hospital. 15th ICEE.2018.
17. Sociedade Brasileira de Farmácia Hospitalar – SBRAFH. Padrões mínimos para farmácia hospitalar. São Paulo: SBRAFH; 2017. Available from: www.sbrafh.org.br/site/public/docs/padroes.pdf
18. Conselho Federal de Farmácia – CFF. Resolução Nº 470: Regula as atividades do Farmacêutico em gases e misturas de uso terapêutico e para fins de diagnóstico. Brasil. CFF (28 de março de 2008).
19. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. RDC nº 69: Dispõe sobre as Boas Práticas de Fabricação de Gases Medicinais. Brasil. (1 º de outubro de 2008a).
20. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. RDC nº 70: Dispõe sobre a notificação de Gases Medicinais. Brasil (1º de outubro de 2008b).
21. World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 Clinical management Living guidance. WHO, January 2021.
22. Bohren MA, Vogel JP, Fawole B, Maya ET, Maung TM, Baldé MD, et al. Methodological development of tools to measure how women are treated during facility-based childbirth in four countries: labor observation and community survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;(18)132:1–15.
23. Catunda HLO, Bernardo EBR, Vasconcelos CTM, Moura ERF, Pinheiro AKB, Aquino PS. Percurso metodológico em pesquisas de enfermagem para construção e validação de protocolos. Texto Contexto Enferm, 2017; 26(2):1–10.
24. McMillan SS, King M, Tully MP. How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. Int J Clin Pharm. 2016;38:655–662.
25. Fehring R.J. Methods to validate nursing diagnoses. Heart Lung. 1987;16(6):625–9.
26. Bellucci-Júnior JA, Matsuda LM. Construction and validation of an instrument to assess the reception with risk rating. Rev Bras Enferm. 2012;65(5):751–757.
27. Crocker L. Content Validity. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier. 2015;2(4): 2702–2705.
28. Pasquali L. Instrumentação psicológica: Fundamentos e práticas. Porto Alegre, Brasil: Artmed, 2010.
29. Pasquali L. Princípios de elaboração de escalas psicológicas. Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica. 1998;25(5):206–213.
30. Mousazadeh S, Rakhshan M, Mohammadi F. Investigation of Content and Face Validity and Reliability of Sociocultural Attitude towards Appearance Questionnaire-3 (SATAQ-3) among Female Adolescents. Iran J Psychiatry. 2017;12(1):15–20.
31. Zamanzadeh V, Ghahramanian A, Rassouli M, Abbaszadeh A, Alavi-Majd H, Nikanfar A. Design and Implementation Content Validity Study: Development of an instrument for measuring Patient-Centered Communication. J Caring Sci. 2015;4(2):165-178.
32. Donabedian A. Basic approaches to assessment: structure, process and outcome. Michigan: Health Administration Press; 1980.
33. Cerqueira-Santos S, Rocha KSS, Boaventura TC, Jesus SEM, Silvestre CC, Sodré-Alves BMC, et al. Development and content validation of an instrument to document the dispensing of prescribed medicines. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2019;1–10.
34. Coluci MZO, Alexandre NMC, Milani D. Construction of measurement instruments in the area of health. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2015; 20(3):925–936.
35. Vedam S, Rossiter C, Homer CSE, Stoll K, Scarf VL. The ResQu Index: A new instrument to appraise the quality of research on birth place. PloS one. 2017;12(8):e0182991.
36. Zumbo BD. Standard-setting methodology: Establishing performance standards and setting cut-scores to assist score interpretation. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2016;41:S74–S82.
37. George S, Haque MS, Oyebode F. Standard setting: Comparison of two methods. BMC Medical Education. 2006;6:46.
38. Bandaranayake RC. Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37. Med Teach. 2008;30:836–845.
39. Norcini JJ. Setting standards on educational tests. Med Educ. 2003;37:464–469.
40. Angel1 CM, Woldetsadik MA, McDaniel JT, Armstrong NJ, Young BB, Linsner R.K, Pinter JM. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Enriched Life Scale Among US Military Veterans. Front in Psychol. 2019.
41. Isaac S, Michael WB. Handbook in research and evaluation: A collection of principles, methods, and strategies useful in the planning, design, and evaluation of studies in education and the behavioral sciences. California: Edit publishers. 1971.
42. Chattopadhyay R. Impact of Forced Distribution System of Performance Evaluation on Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Global Business Review. 2017; 20(3):1–12.
43. Manual Brasileiro de Acreditação: Serviços para a Saúde – Selo de Qualificação ONA. ONA; 2020.
44. JCI. Consórcio brasileiro de acreditação (CBA). Joint Comission International (JCI). Padrões de Acreditação da Joint Comission International para hospitais. 4. ed. Rio de Janeiro: CBA; 2010.
45. Silver NC, Badenes-Ribera L, Pedroli E. Scale Development and Score Validation. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA. 2020.
46. Roncalli AA, Oliveira DN, Silva ICM, Brito RF, Viegas SMF. Manchester protocol and user population in the risk assessment: the nurse’s view. Rev. Bai Enfer. 2017;31(2):e16949.
47. Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214–221
48. O’Neill TA. An Overview of Interrater Agreement on Likert Scales for Researchers and Practitioners. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:1-15.
49. James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. An Assessment of Within-Group Interrater Agreement. J of Appl Psychol. 1993;78(2)306–309.
50. Alexandre NMC, Coluci MZO. Content validity in the development and adaptation processes of measurement instruments. Cien Saude Colet. 2011; 16(7):3061–3068.
51. Gorostiaga A, Aliri J, Ulacia I, Soroa G, Balluerka N, Aritzeta A, et al. Assessmentof Entrepreneurial Orientationin Vocational Training Students:Development of a New Scaleand Relationships With Self-Efficacy and Personal Initiative. Front. Psychol. 2019;10:1125.
52. The American Institute of Architects Academy of Architecture for Health - AIA. Guidelines for design and construction of hospital and health care facilities. 2001.
53. Argentina. Ministerio de Salud. Resolución 1130/2000: Apruébase el Reglamento para la fabricación, importación, comercialización y Registro de gases medicinales. (15 de diciembre de 2000).
54. Brasil. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. Resolução - RDC n º 50: Dispõe sobre o regulamento técnico para planejamento, programação, elaboração e avaliação de projetos físicos de estabelecimentos assistenciais de saúde. Brasil (21 de fevereiro de 2002).
55. European Medicines Agency - EMEA. Guideline on medicinal gases: pharmaceutical documentation. including recommendation on nonclinical safety requirements for well established medicinal gases. EMEA. London; 2008.
56. European Union. Directive 2000/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC). Official Journal. 2000;262:21–45.
57. The facility guidelines institute - FGI. Guidelines for design and construction of health care facilities. 2010.
58. French Red Cross. A source of design reference standards: handbook to build an hospital. Maldives. 2006.
59. Autoridade Nacional do Medicamento e Produtos de Saúde, I.P - INFARMAD. Circular informativa infarmed nº236/CD: Sistemas para a distribuição de gases medicinais. Lisboa, 2012.
60. Amor-García MA, Ibáñez-García S, Díaz-Redondo A, Alonso AH, Sáez MS. Estrategia multidisciplinar para reducir errores en el uso de los gases medicinales. Farmacia Hospitalaria. 2018;42(3):103–7.
61. Food and Drug Administration - FDA. Compliance program guidance manual: compressed medical gases. 2015.
62. Jesus EMS, Onozato T, Cardoso AV, Santana RS, Santos AS, Silva DT, et al. Development and validation of a hospital pharmaceutical services assessment tool. Rev. Bras. Farm. Hosp. Serv. Saúde. 2015; 6(4):6–11.
63. Joint Commission International. Joint Commission International accreditation: standards for hospitals. 2017; 6ª ed.
64. Epstein J, MiyukiSanto R, Guillemin F. A review of guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires could not bring out a consensus. J of Clin Epid. 2015; 68(4):435–441.
65. Li J, Denise L, Li Y, Luo Y. Development and initial validation of a clinical measure to assess early symptoms of post-stroke depression in the acute stroke patient. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(3-4):784–794.
66. Sureda X, Espelt A, Villalbí JR, Cebrecos A, Baranda L, Pearce J, Franco, M. Development and evaluation of the OHCITIES instrument: assessing alcohol urban environments in the Heart Healthy Hoods project. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017362.
67. Vargas‑Porras C, Roa‑Diaz ZM, Barnes C, Adamson‑Macedo EM, Ferre‑Grau1 C, Molina‑Fernandez MI. Psychometric properties of the spanish version of the perceived maternal parenting self‑efficacy (PMP S‑E) tool for primiparous women. Mater and child health j. 2020;24(5):537–545.
68. Dargahi H, Khosravi SH. Hospitals pharmacy quality assurance system assessment in Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Iranian J Publ Health. 2010; 39(4):102–113.
69. Rocha KSS, Santos SC, Boaventura TC, Santos-Júnior GA, Araújo DCSA, Silvestre CC, et al. Development and content validation of an instrument to support pharmaceutical counselling for dispensing of prescribed medicines. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020;26:134–141.
70. McBride AJ, Pates R, Ramadan R, McGowan C. Delphi survey of experts’ opinions on strategies used by community pharmacists to reduce over-the-counter drug misuse. Addiction. 2003; 98:487–497.
71. Echevarría-Guanilo ME, Gonçalves N, Romanoski PJ. Psychometric properties of measurement instruments: conceptual bases and evaluation methods – part I. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2017;26(4):e1600017.
72. Asunta P, Viholainen H, Ahonen T, Rintala P. Psychometric properties of observational tools for identifying motor difficulties – a systematic review. BMC Pediatrics. 2019;19:322.
73. Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol. Serv. Saude. 2017;26(3):649–659.
74. Gonçalves AMRF, Campos MSA, Bernardes A, Gabriel CS, Pereira LRL. Development and validation of an instrument to measure the professional’s knowledge of dispensing medication (CDM-51) in community pharmacies. Plos One. 2020; 15(3):e0229855.
75. Vo TH. Evaluation of the potential impact of pharmacist interventions: development and validation of the CLEO multidimensional tool [these]. L’Université Grenoble Alpes; 2016.
76. El-Hmoudova D. Assessment of individual learning style preferences with respect to the key language competences. Procedia-Social and Beh Sci. 2015;171:40 – 48.
77. Santos AAA, Mognon JF. Estilos de aprendizagem em estudantes universitários. Boletim de psicologia. 2010; 60(133): 229-241.
78. Kannan P, Sgammato A, Tannenbaum RJ, Katz IR. Evaluating the Consistency of angoff-based cut scores using subsets of items within a generalizability theory framework. Appl. Measure. Edu. 2015; 28:169–186.
79. Perroca MG, Gaidzinski RR. Assessing the interrater reliability of an instrument for classifying patients – kappa quotient. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2003; 37(1):72–80.
80. Stewart SM, Gruys ML, Storm M. Forced distribution performance evaluation systems: Advantages, disadvantages and keys to implementation. J of Man & Org. 2010; 16:168–179.
81. Health and Food Safety Directorate-General. Tools and methodologies to assess the efficiency of health care services in Europe. European Union, 2019.
2. Soni N, Maheshwari DG. Overview of regulatory requirements for medical gases and pharmaceutical gases. Inter Journal of Res in Pharm and Pharma Sciences. 2017;2(6): 61-64.
3. Luisetto M, Sahu RK. Hospital Medicine Gas Management System: The Pharmacist Role in a Pharmaceutical - Chemistry Setting-Results of a Practical Experience in an Advanced Country. Adv Bioeng Bio Sci Res. 2019;2(3):1–10.
4. Calligaro GL, Lallac U, Audleyd G, Gina P, Miller MG, Mendelson M et al. The utility of high-flow nasal oxygen for severe COVID-19 pneumonia in a resource-constrained setting: A multi-centre prospective observational study. E Clin Med. 2020;28:100570.
5. De-Juilio PA, Jenkins MB, Huml JP. Evaluation of Safety and Cost of an Open-Design Oxygen Mask in a Large Community Hospital. Resp care. 2018;63(4):412–416.
6. Sangiorgi E, Carati D, Mazzolani M, Mazzetti I, Fraticelli A. Safety Management of Medical Gas Plants in Healthcare Structures of the Emilia Romagna Region. Ital J of Clin Pharm, 2015.
7. Herve-Bazin M, Durand D, Cardona F, Maison P. Medication errors related to the administration of medicinal gases in France: one of the 12 french never events. Congreso de la Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé (ANSM). 2016.
8. Associação Portuguesa das Empresas Químicas - APEQ. Manual hospitalar: boas práticas de gestão de gases medicinais. 1ªed. Lisboa: APEQ; 2017. Portuguese.
9. Salah M, Osman H, Hosny O. Performance-Based Reliability-Centered Maintenance Planning for Hospital Facilities. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2018;32(1):1–7.
10. Gómez-Chaparro M, García-Sanz-Calcedo J, Márquez LA. Analytical Determination of Medical Gases Consumption and Their Impact on Hospital Sustainability. Sustainability. 2018;10(8):2948.
11. Kamran A, Chia E, Tobin, C. Acute oxygen therapy: an audit of prescribing and delivery practices in a tertiary hospital in Perth, Western Australia. Internal medicine jornal. 2018; 48(2):151–157.
12. Hatling D, Hogset A, Guttormsen AB, Müller B. Iatrogenic cerebral gas embolism: A systematic review of case reports. Acta Anaest Scand. 2019;63:154–160.
13. Gunathilake R, Lowe D, Wills J, Knight A, Braude P. Implementation of a multicomponent intervention to optimise patient safety through improved Oxygen prescription in a rural hospital. Aust. J. Rural Health. 2014;22:328–333.
14. Rioseco PS, Rodríguez NO, Skog SM, Rozas, EC, Sepúlveda AN. Auditoría de oxígenoterapia de pacientes hospitalizados en establecimientos del Servicio de Salud Talcahuano. Rev Chil Enferm Resp. 2017;33:91–98.
15. Salamano M, Palchik V, Botta C, Colautti M, Bianchi M, Traverso ML. Seguridad del paciente: aplicación de gestión de calidad para prevenir errores de medicación en el circuito de uso de medicamentos. Rev Calid Asist. 2013;28(1):28–35.
16. Lasomsri P, Yanbuaban P, Kerdpoca O, Ouypornkochagorn T. A Development of Low-Cost Devices for Monitoring Indoor Air Quality in a Large-Scale Hospital. 15th ICEE.2018.
17. Sociedade Brasileira de Farmácia Hospitalar – SBRAFH. Padrões mínimos para farmácia hospitalar. São Paulo: SBRAFH; 2017. Available from: www.sbrafh.org.br/site/public/docs/padroes.pdf
18. Conselho Federal de Farmácia – CFF. Resolução Nº 470: Regula as atividades do Farmacêutico em gases e misturas de uso terapêutico e para fins de diagnóstico. Brasil. CFF (28 de março de 2008).
19. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. RDC nº 69: Dispõe sobre as Boas Práticas de Fabricação de Gases Medicinais. Brasil. (1 º de outubro de 2008a).
20. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. RDC nº 70: Dispõe sobre a notificação de Gases Medicinais. Brasil (1º de outubro de 2008b).
21. World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 Clinical management Living guidance. WHO, January 2021.
22. Bohren MA, Vogel JP, Fawole B, Maya ET, Maung TM, Baldé MD, et al. Methodological development of tools to measure how women are treated during facility-based childbirth in four countries: labor observation and community survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;(18)132:1–15.
23. Catunda HLO, Bernardo EBR, Vasconcelos CTM, Moura ERF, Pinheiro AKB, Aquino PS. Percurso metodológico em pesquisas de enfermagem para construção e validação de protocolos. Texto Contexto Enferm, 2017; 26(2):1–10.
24. McMillan SS, King M, Tully MP. How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. Int J Clin Pharm. 2016;38:655–662.
25. Fehring R.J. Methods to validate nursing diagnoses. Heart Lung. 1987;16(6):625–9.
26. Bellucci-Júnior JA, Matsuda LM. Construction and validation of an instrument to assess the reception with risk rating. Rev Bras Enferm. 2012;65(5):751–757.
27. Crocker L. Content Validity. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier. 2015;2(4): 2702–2705.
28. Pasquali L. Instrumentação psicológica: Fundamentos e práticas. Porto Alegre, Brasil: Artmed, 2010.
29. Pasquali L. Princípios de elaboração de escalas psicológicas. Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica. 1998;25(5):206–213.
30. Mousazadeh S, Rakhshan M, Mohammadi F. Investigation of Content and Face Validity and Reliability of Sociocultural Attitude towards Appearance Questionnaire-3 (SATAQ-3) among Female Adolescents. Iran J Psychiatry. 2017;12(1):15–20.
31. Zamanzadeh V, Ghahramanian A, Rassouli M, Abbaszadeh A, Alavi-Majd H, Nikanfar A. Design and Implementation Content Validity Study: Development of an instrument for measuring Patient-Centered Communication. J Caring Sci. 2015;4(2):165-178.
32. Donabedian A. Basic approaches to assessment: structure, process and outcome. Michigan: Health Administration Press; 1980.
33. Cerqueira-Santos S, Rocha KSS, Boaventura TC, Jesus SEM, Silvestre CC, Sodré-Alves BMC, et al. Development and content validation of an instrument to document the dispensing of prescribed medicines. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2019;1–10.
34. Coluci MZO, Alexandre NMC, Milani D. Construction of measurement instruments in the area of health. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2015; 20(3):925–936.
35. Vedam S, Rossiter C, Homer CSE, Stoll K, Scarf VL. The ResQu Index: A new instrument to appraise the quality of research on birth place. PloS one. 2017;12(8):e0182991.
36. Zumbo BD. Standard-setting methodology: Establishing performance standards and setting cut-scores to assist score interpretation. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2016;41:S74–S82.
37. George S, Haque MS, Oyebode F. Standard setting: Comparison of two methods. BMC Medical Education. 2006;6:46.
38. Bandaranayake RC. Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37. Med Teach. 2008;30:836–845.
39. Norcini JJ. Setting standards on educational tests. Med Educ. 2003;37:464–469.
40. Angel1 CM, Woldetsadik MA, McDaniel JT, Armstrong NJ, Young BB, Linsner R.K, Pinter JM. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Enriched Life Scale Among US Military Veterans. Front in Psychol. 2019.
41. Isaac S, Michael WB. Handbook in research and evaluation: A collection of principles, methods, and strategies useful in the planning, design, and evaluation of studies in education and the behavioral sciences. California: Edit publishers. 1971.
42. Chattopadhyay R. Impact of Forced Distribution System of Performance Evaluation on Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Global Business Review. 2017; 20(3):1–12.
43. Manual Brasileiro de Acreditação: Serviços para a Saúde – Selo de Qualificação ONA. ONA; 2020.
44. JCI. Consórcio brasileiro de acreditação (CBA). Joint Comission International (JCI). Padrões de Acreditação da Joint Comission International para hospitais. 4. ed. Rio de Janeiro: CBA; 2010.
45. Silver NC, Badenes-Ribera L, Pedroli E. Scale Development and Score Validation. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA. 2020.
46. Roncalli AA, Oliveira DN, Silva ICM, Brito RF, Viegas SMF. Manchester protocol and user population in the risk assessment: the nurse’s view. Rev. Bai Enfer. 2017;31(2):e16949.
47. Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214–221
48. O’Neill TA. An Overview of Interrater Agreement on Likert Scales for Researchers and Practitioners. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:1-15.
49. James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. An Assessment of Within-Group Interrater Agreement. J of Appl Psychol. 1993;78(2)306–309.
50. Alexandre NMC, Coluci MZO. Content validity in the development and adaptation processes of measurement instruments. Cien Saude Colet. 2011; 16(7):3061–3068.
51. Gorostiaga A, Aliri J, Ulacia I, Soroa G, Balluerka N, Aritzeta A, et al. Assessmentof Entrepreneurial Orientationin Vocational Training Students:Development of a New Scaleand Relationships With Self-Efficacy and Personal Initiative. Front. Psychol. 2019;10:1125.
52. The American Institute of Architects Academy of Architecture for Health - AIA. Guidelines for design and construction of hospital and health care facilities. 2001.
53. Argentina. Ministerio de Salud. Resolución 1130/2000: Apruébase el Reglamento para la fabricación, importación, comercialización y Registro de gases medicinales. (15 de diciembre de 2000).
54. Brasil. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA. Resolução - RDC n º 50: Dispõe sobre o regulamento técnico para planejamento, programação, elaboração e avaliação de projetos físicos de estabelecimentos assistenciais de saúde. Brasil (21 de fevereiro de 2002).
55. European Medicines Agency - EMEA. Guideline on medicinal gases: pharmaceutical documentation. including recommendation on nonclinical safety requirements for well established medicinal gases. EMEA. London; 2008.
56. European Union. Directive 2000/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC). Official Journal. 2000;262:21–45.
57. The facility guidelines institute - FGI. Guidelines for design and construction of health care facilities. 2010.
58. French Red Cross. A source of design reference standards: handbook to build an hospital. Maldives. 2006.
59. Autoridade Nacional do Medicamento e Produtos de Saúde, I.P - INFARMAD. Circular informativa infarmed nº236/CD: Sistemas para a distribuição de gases medicinais. Lisboa, 2012.
60. Amor-García MA, Ibáñez-García S, Díaz-Redondo A, Alonso AH, Sáez MS. Estrategia multidisciplinar para reducir errores en el uso de los gases medicinales. Farmacia Hospitalaria. 2018;42(3):103–7.
61. Food and Drug Administration - FDA. Compliance program guidance manual: compressed medical gases. 2015.
62. Jesus EMS, Onozato T, Cardoso AV, Santana RS, Santos AS, Silva DT, et al. Development and validation of a hospital pharmaceutical services assessment tool. Rev. Bras. Farm. Hosp. Serv. Saúde. 2015; 6(4):6–11.
63. Joint Commission International. Joint Commission International accreditation: standards for hospitals. 2017; 6ª ed.
64. Epstein J, MiyukiSanto R, Guillemin F. A review of guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires could not bring out a consensus. J of Clin Epid. 2015; 68(4):435–441.
65. Li J, Denise L, Li Y, Luo Y. Development and initial validation of a clinical measure to assess early symptoms of post-stroke depression in the acute stroke patient. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(3-4):784–794.
66. Sureda X, Espelt A, Villalbí JR, Cebrecos A, Baranda L, Pearce J, Franco, M. Development and evaluation of the OHCITIES instrument: assessing alcohol urban environments in the Heart Healthy Hoods project. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017362.
67. Vargas‑Porras C, Roa‑Diaz ZM, Barnes C, Adamson‑Macedo EM, Ferre‑Grau1 C, Molina‑Fernandez MI. Psychometric properties of the spanish version of the perceived maternal parenting self‑efficacy (PMP S‑E) tool for primiparous women. Mater and child health j. 2020;24(5):537–545.
68. Dargahi H, Khosravi SH. Hospitals pharmacy quality assurance system assessment in Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. Iranian J Publ Health. 2010; 39(4):102–113.
69. Rocha KSS, Santos SC, Boaventura TC, Santos-Júnior GA, Araújo DCSA, Silvestre CC, et al. Development and content validation of an instrument to support pharmaceutical counselling for dispensing of prescribed medicines. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020;26:134–141.
70. McBride AJ, Pates R, Ramadan R, McGowan C. Delphi survey of experts’ opinions on strategies used by community pharmacists to reduce over-the-counter drug misuse. Addiction. 2003; 98:487–497.
71. Echevarría-Guanilo ME, Gonçalves N, Romanoski PJ. Psychometric properties of measurement instruments: conceptual bases and evaluation methods – part I. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2017;26(4):e1600017.
72. Asunta P, Viholainen H, Ahonen T, Rintala P. Psychometric properties of observational tools for identifying motor difficulties – a systematic review. BMC Pediatrics. 2019;19:322.
73. Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol. Serv. Saude. 2017;26(3):649–659.
74. Gonçalves AMRF, Campos MSA, Bernardes A, Gabriel CS, Pereira LRL. Development and validation of an instrument to measure the professional’s knowledge of dispensing medication (CDM-51) in community pharmacies. Plos One. 2020; 15(3):e0229855.
75. Vo TH. Evaluation of the potential impact of pharmacist interventions: development and validation of the CLEO multidimensional tool [these]. L’Université Grenoble Alpes; 2016.
76. El-Hmoudova D. Assessment of individual learning style preferences with respect to the key language competences. Procedia-Social and Beh Sci. 2015;171:40 – 48.
77. Santos AAA, Mognon JF. Estilos de aprendizagem em estudantes universitários. Boletim de psicologia. 2010; 60(133): 229-241.
78. Kannan P, Sgammato A, Tannenbaum RJ, Katz IR. Evaluating the Consistency of angoff-based cut scores using subsets of items within a generalizability theory framework. Appl. Measure. Edu. 2015; 28:169–186.
79. Perroca MG, Gaidzinski RR. Assessing the interrater reliability of an instrument for classifying patients – kappa quotient. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2003; 37(1):72–80.
80. Stewart SM, Gruys ML, Storm M. Forced distribution performance evaluation systems: Advantages, disadvantages and keys to implementation. J of Man & Org. 2010; 16:168–179.
81. Health and Food Safety Directorate-General. Tools and methodologies to assess the efficiency of health care services in Europe. European Union, 2019.
Downloads
Publicado
2021-11-02
Como Citar
Ramalho de Amorim , F. J., Santos de Jesus , E. M., Cerqueira-Santos, S., Marques Cavalcante Santos, L. ., Menezes da Cunha Barros, I., & Pereira de Lyra Júnior, D. (2021). VALIDATION OF AN INNOVATIVE INSTRUMENT FOR EVALUATING GOOD PRACTICES REGARDING THE USE OF MEDICAL GASES IN HOSPITALS: Validação de um instrumento inovador para avaliação de Boas práticas quanto ao uso de gases medicinais em hospitais. Revista Interdisciplinar De Pesquisa E Inovação, 10(1), 106–131. Recuperado de https://ufs.emnuvens.com.br/revipi/article/view/16557
Edição
Seção
Artigo
Licença
Declaro que o presente artigo é original, não tendo sido submetido à publicação em qualquer outro periódico nacional ou internacional, quer seja em parte ou em sua totalidade. declaro, ainda, que uma vez publicado na revista RevIPI, editada pela Associação Sergipana de Ciência, o mesmo jamais será submetido por mim ou por qualquer um dos demais co-autores a qualquer outro periódico. Através deste instrumento, em meu nome e em nome dos demais co-autores, por ventura existentes, cedo os direitos autorais do referido artigo à Associação Sergipana de Ciência, que está autorizada a publicá-lo em meio impresso, digital, ou outro existente, nesta revista de acesso público, os artigos são de uso gratuito, com atribuições próprias, em aplicações educacionais e não-comerciais.
Licenciada por 