期刊论文详细信息
BMC Infectious Diseases
Physicians’ attitudes and knowledge concerning antibiotic prescription and resistance: questionnaire development and reliability
Research Article
Mónica Ferreira1  Maria Teresa Herdeiro2  António Teixeira Rodrigues3  Fátima Roque4  Amílcar Falcão5  Elmano Ramalheira6  Adolfo Figueiras7 
[1] Department of Medical Sciences and Institute for Biomedicine – iBiMED, University of Aveiro, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal;Department of Medical Sciences and Institute for Biomedicine – iBiMED, University of Aveiro, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal;CESPU, IINFACTS, Instituto de Investigação e Formação Avançada em Ciências e Tecnologias da Saúde, Gandra, Portugal;Department of Medical Sciences and Institute for Biomedicine – iBiMED, University of Aveiro, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal;Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal;Department of Medical Sciences and Institute for Biomedicine – iBiMED, University of Aveiro, 3810-193, Aveiro, Portugal;Research Unit for Inland Development, Polytechnic Institute of Guarda, Guarda, Portugal;Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal;Centre for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal;Hospital Infante D. Pedro, EPE, Aveiro, Portugal;University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain;Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology & Public Health (CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública -CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain;
关键词: Attitudes;    Knowledge;    Antibiotic resistance;    Questionnaire;    Reliability;   
DOI  :  10.1186/s12879-015-1332-y
 received in 2015-01-07, accepted in 2015-12-30,  发布年份 2016
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundUnderstanding physicians’ antibiotic-prescribing behaviour is fundamental when it comes to improving antibiotic use and tackling the growing rates of antimicrobial resistance. The aim of the study was to develop and validate -in terms of face validity, content validity and reliability- an instrument designed to assess the attitudes and knowledge underlying physician antibiotic prescribing.MethodsThe questionnaire development and validation process comprised two different steps, namely: (1) content and face validation, which included a literature review and validation both by physicians and by Portuguese language and clinical psychology experts; and (2) reliability analysis, using the test-retest method, to assess the questionnaire’s internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient - ICC). The questionnaire includes 17 items assessing attitudes and knowledge about antibiotic prescribing and resistances and 9 items evaluating the importance of different sources of knowledge. The study was conducted in the catchment area covered by Portugal’s Northern Regional Health Administration and used a convenience sample of 61 primary-care and 50 hospital-care physicians.ResultsResponse rate was 64 % (49 % to retest) for primary-care physicians and 66 % (60 % to retest) for hospital-care physicians. Content validity resulted in 9 changes to professional concepts. Face validity assessment resulted in 19 changes to linguistic and interpretative terms. In the case of the reliability analysis, the ICC values indicated a minimum of fair to good reproducibility (ICC > 0.4), and the Cronbach alpha values were satisfactory (α > 0.70).ConclusionsThe questionnaire developed is valid -in terms of face validity, content validity and reliability- for assessing physicians’ attitudes to and knowledge of antibiotic prescribing and resistance, in both hospital and primary-care settings, and could be a very useful tool for characterising physicians’ antibiotic-prescribing behaviour.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Teixeira Rodrigues et al. 2016

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202311109029167ZK.pdf 570KB PDF download
【 参考文献 】
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7]
  • [8]
  • [9]
  • [10]
  • [11]
  • [12]
  • [13]
  • [14]
  • [15]
  • [16]
  • [17]
  • [18]
  • [19]
  • [20]
  • [21]
  • [22]
  • [23]
  • [24]
  • [25]
  • [26]
  • [27]
  • [28]
  • [29]
  • [30]
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  • [37]
  • [38]
  • [39]
  • [40]
  • [41]
  • [42]
  • [43]
  • [44]
  • [45]
  • [46]
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:7次 浏览次数:0次