Nomology, validity, and interprofessional research: The missing link(s)

Psychometric Properties of the German Version of the Perception of Interprofessional Collaboration Model-Questionnaire (PINCOM-Q)

OBJECTIVE

The Perception of Interprofessional Collaboration-Model Questionnaire (PINCOM-Q) measures professionals' perceptions of interprofessional collaboration in the field of child and youth mental health. The aim of this study was to validate the PINCOM-Q in a sample of German child welfare and child and youth mental health professionals.

METHODS

The PINCOM-Q was translated into German and its underlying factor structure was examined using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Findings from this study suggest four factors (Interprofessional Climate, Conflict, Role Expectancy and Shared Goals, and Motivation) capture the concept of perceptions of interprofessional collaboration between child welfare and child and adolescent psychiatry.

CONCLUSION

The use of PINCOM-Q (German) can be recommended as a research tool, investigating professional groups working with children and young people with multiple and complex needs.

Spanish version of the readiness for interprofessional learning scale (RIPLS) in an undergraduate health sciences student context

The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) has been widely used to measure students' and professionals' attitudes toward interprofessional learning. However, inconsistencies have been reported concerning its validity and reliability. This study aimed to translate, adapt, and validate the RIPLS questionnaire to be applied to Spanish-speaking health sciences students in Chile. Content and construct validity evidence of the newly created Spanish version of the RIPLS scale were analyzed. An exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) analysis were conducted, determining goodness-of-fit indexes. Reliability was evaluated through Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient. We assessed sensitivity to change of the RIPLS scale by comparing pre- and post-interprofessional education workshop scores. The EFA showed that there were three factors. In the CFA, most of the standardized factor loadings were higher than 0.3. Regarding internal consistency, Cronbach's Alpha was 0.86. The differences between the total RIPLS scores before and after the workshops were statistically significant. The Spanish version of RIPLS showed evidence of validity and reliability for use amongst health sciences students. The construct was adequately measured and was shown that it could be used to assess the impact of interprofessional education workshops.