Validación de la versión española del cuestionario sobre la práctica basada en la evidencia en enfermería

Background: The lack of adequate instruments prevents the possibility of assessing the competence of health care staff in evidence-based decision making and further, the identification of areas for improvement with tailored strategies. The aim of this study is to report about the validation process in the Spanish context of the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (EBPQ) from Upton y Upton. Methods: A multicentre, cross-sectional, descriptive psychometric validation study was carried out. For cultural adaptation, a bidirectional translation was developed, accordingly to usual standards. The measuring model from the questionnaire was undergone to contrast, reproducing the original structure by Exploratory Factorial Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (CFA), including the reliability of factors. Results: Both EFA (57.545% of total variance explained) and CFA (chi2=2359,9555; gl=252; p<0.0001; RMSEA=0,1844; SRMR=0,1081), detected problems with items 7, 16, 22, 23 and 24, regarding to the original trifactorial version of EBPQ. After deleting some questions, a reduced version containing 19 items obtained an adequate factorial structure (62.29% of total variance explained), but the CFA did not fit well. Nevertheless, it was significantly better than the original version (chi2=673.1261; gl=149; p<0.0001; RMSEA=0.1196; SRMR=0.0648). Conclusions: The trifactorial model obtained good empiric evidence and could be used in our context, but the results invite to advance with further refinements into the factor “attitude”, testing it in more contexts and with more diverse professional profiles.

Altered adaptive but not veridical decision-making in substance dependent individuals.

Drug addiction is associated with impaired judgment in unstructured situations in which success depends on self-regulation of behavior according to internal goals (adaptive decision-making). However most executive measures are aimed at assessing decision-making in structured scenarios, in which success is determined by external criteria inherent to the situation (veridical decision-making). The aim of this study was to examine the performance of Substance Abusers (SA, n = 97) and Healthy Comparison participants (HC, n = 81) in two behavioral tasks that mimic the uncertainty inherent in real-life decision-making: the Cognitive Bias Task (CB) and the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) (administered only to SA). A related goal was to study the interdependence between performances on both tasks. We conducted univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) to contrast the decision-making performance of both groups; and used correlation analyses to study the relationship between both tasks. SA showed a marked context-independent decision-making strategy on the CB's adaptive condition, but no differences were found on the veridical conditions in a subsample of SA (n = 34) and HC (n = 22). A high percentage of SA (75%) also showed impaired performance on the IGT. Both tasks were only correlated when no impaired participants were selected. Results indicate that SA show abnormal decision-making performance in unstructured situations, but not in veridical situations.