Tip 1 Diabetes Mellituslu 12- 18 Yaş Arası Adölesanlarda Kan Şekeri Ölçüm Becerilerini Değerlendirme Ölçeği: Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması

Amaç: Bu araştırma Tip 1 Diabetes Mellituslu 12- 18 yaş arası adölesanlarda kan şekeri ölçüm becerileri değerlendirme ölçeğini geliştirebilmek için planlanmış bir ölçek geliştirme çalışmasıdır. Yöntem: Araştırma metodolojik tipte olup Tip 1 Diabetus Mellitus tanılı 12-18 yaş arasında olan ve araştırmaya katılmak için gönüllü olan 309 adölesan ile yapılmıştır. Araştırmada veri toplama yönteminde, 'Tanıtıcı Bilgi Formu' ve geliştirilmiş olan 35 maddelik 'Kan Şekeri Ölçüm Becerileri Taslak Form' kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizi SPSS 25.0 ve Amos paket programları kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. 'Kan Şekeri Ölçüm Becerileri Taslak Forumu’nun kapsam geçerliliği ise Davis Tekniği kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirliği için ise Cronbach Alpha katsayısı, madde toplam puan korelasyonları, açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri uygulanmıştır. Bulgular: Tip 1 Diabetes Mellituslu 12- 18 Yaş Arası Adölesanlarda Kan Şekeri Ölçüm Becerileri Değerlendirme Ölçeği toplam varyansın %73,558'ini açıklayan 5 alt boyuttan ve 28 maddeden oluşmaktadır. Ölçeğin Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) değeri ise 0.888, Bartlett's küresellik Testi ise X2=7207,466 olarak istatistiksel ileri düzeyde anlamlı bulunmuştur. Ölçek maddelerinin kapsam geçerlilik indeksi ise 0,85-1,00; faktör yükleri ise 0,61-0,96; madde toplam puan korelasyonları 0,427- 0,653 ve alt boyutların Cronbach Alpha Güvenirlik Katsayısı= 0,895- 0,946 olup yüksek güvenirliktedir. Sonuç: Araştırmamızda geliştirilmiş olan Tip 1 Diabetes Mellituslu 12- 18 Yaş Arası Adölesanlarda Kan Şekeri Ölçüm Becerilerini Değerlendirme Ölçeği beşli likert tipte bir ölçek olup 28 madde ve 5 alt boyuttan oluşan geçerli ve güvenilir ölçektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Tip 1 Diyabet, Geçerlik ve güvenirlik, Kan Glukoz Ölçümü, Ölçek geliştirme, Adölesan.

BLOOD GLUCOSE MEASURING SKILLS of ADOLESCENTS AGED BETWEEN 12 and 18 YEARS with TYPE 1 DIABETES MELLITUS: INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT and PSYCHOMETRIC TESTING

Objective: The aim of this study is to develop a blood glucose measurement skills assessment scale in adolescents aged 12-18 years with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. Method: The study is of methodological type and was conducted with 309 adolescents aged 12-18 years who were diagnosed with Type-1 Diabetes Mellitus and volunteered to participate in the study. The 'Descriptive Information Form' and the developed 'Blood Glucose Measurement Skills Draft Form' consisting of 35 items were used in the research. SPSS 25.0 and Amos package programs were used for data analysis. Content validity of the 'Blood Glucose Measurement Skills Draft Forum' Davis Technique was used. Cronbach Alpha coefficient, item-total score correlations, explanatory and confirmatory factor analyzes were used for the validity and reliability of the scale. Results: Factor analysis results supported the 28-item as multidimensional with five domains. In adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus between the ages of 12 and 18, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of the Blood Glucose Measurement Skills Assessment Scale was 0.888, and the result of the Bartlett's Test was found to be statistically highly significant (X2 = 7207.466). The content validity index of the scale items was between 0.85 and 1.00, factor loadings were between 0.61 and 0.96, item-total score correlations were between 0.427 and 0.653 and the Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient of the sub-dimensions was between 0.895 and 0.946 indicating high reliability. Conclusion: The 'Scale for Evaluation of Blood Glucose Measurement Skills in Adolescents aged 12-18 with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (BGMS-A)' developed in our study is a five-point Likert type, and it is a valid and reliable scale consisting of 28 items and 5 sub-dimensions.

Keywords:

Blood Glucose Measurement, Skill, Type 1 Diabetes, Adolescent, Scale Development,

PDF

___

1. Doherty, A. (2015). Psychiatric aspects of diabetes mellitus. BJPsych Advances, 21(6), 407-416. doi:10.1192/apt.bp.114.013532
2. American Diabetes Association. (2021) Introduction: Standards Of Medical Care In Diabetes-2021. Diabetes Care. ( Supplement_1):S1–S2. doi: 10.2337/dc21-Sint.
3. Felner, E. I., Klitz, W., Ham, M., Lazaro, A. M., Stastny, P., Dupont, B., & White, P. C. (2005). Genetic interaction among three genomic regions creates distinct contributions to early- and late-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus. Pediatric diabetes, 6(4), 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-543X.2005.00132.x
4. International Diabetes Federation (IDF). (2021). Diabetes Atlas. 10th Edition,Access Address: https://diabetesatlas.org/atlas/tenth-edition/ Access Date: July 16, 2022
5. Ogle, G. D., James, S., Dabelea, D., Pihoker, C., Svennson, J., Maniam, J., Klatman, E. L., & Patterson, C. C. (2022). Global estimates of incidence of type 1 diabetes in children and adolescents: Results from the International Diabetes Federation Atlas, 10th edition. Diabetes research and clinical practice, 183, 109083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109083
6. Phillips, J. E., Couper, J. J., Penno, M., Harrison, L. C., & ENDIA Study Group (2017). Type 1 diabetes: a disease of developmental origins. Pediatric diabetes, 18(6), 417–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12425.
7. Ortiz, M., & Ortiz, E. (2005). Adherencia al tratamiento en adolescentes diabéticos tipo 1 chilenos: una aproximación psicológica [Psychological factors associated to patient's treatment compliance in Chilean diabetic teenagers]. Revista medica de Chile, 133(3), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0034-98872005000300006.
8. Lowes, L., Eddy, D., Channon, S., McNamara, R., Robling, M., Gregory, J. W., & DEPICTED study team (2015). The experience of living with type 1 diabetes and attending clinic from the perception of children, adolescents and carers: analysis of qualitative data from the DEPICTED study. Journal of pediatric nursing, 30(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2014.09.006.
9. Boogerd, E. A., Noordam, C., Kremer, J. A., Prins, J. B., & Verhaak, C. M. (2014). Teaming up: feasibility of an online treatment environment for adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatric diabetes, 15(5), 394–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12103
10. Stahl-Pehe, A., Landwehr, S., Lange, K. S., Bächle, C., Castillo, K., Yossa, R., Lüdtke, J., Holl, R. W., & Rosenbauer, J. (2017). Impact of quality of life (QoL) on glycemic control (HbA1c) among adolescents and emerging adults with long-duration type 1 diabetes: A prospective cohort-study. Pediatric diabetes, 18(8), 808–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12487
11. Forsander, G., Bøgelund, M., Haas, J., & Samuelsson, U. (2017). Adolescent life with diabetes-Gender matters for level of distress. Experiences from the national TODS study. Pediatric diabetes, 18(7), 651–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12478
12. Agarwal, S., Garvey, K. C., Raymond, J. K., & Schutta, M. H. (2017). Perspectives on care for young adults with type 1 diabetes transitioning from pediatric to adult health systems: A national survey of pediatric endocrinologists. Pediatric diabetes, 18(7), 524–531. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12436
13. Shrivastava, S.R., Shrivastava, P.S. & Ramasamy, J. Role of self-care in management of diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Metab Disord 12, 14 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/2251-6581-12-14
14. DiMeglio, L. A., Acerini, C. L., Codner, E., Craig, M. E., Hofer, S. E., Pillay, K., & Maahs, D. M. (2018). ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: Glycemic control targets and glucose monitoring for children, adolescents, and young adults with diabetes. Pediatric diabetes, 19 Suppl 27, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12737
15. Abubakari, A. R., Cousins, R., Thomas, C., Sharma, D., & Naderali, E. K. (2016). Sociodemographic and Clinical Predictors of Self-Management among People with Poorly Controlled Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: The Role of Illness Perceptions and Self-Efficacy. Journal of diabetes research, 2016, 6708164. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6708164
16. Ercan, I. and Kan, I. (2004) Reliability and Validity in Scales. Uludag Universiy Journal of College of Medicine, 30, 211-216 17. Westen, D., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Quantifying construct validity: two simple measures. Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(3), 608–618. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.84.3.608
18. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. doi:10.1016/s0897-1897(05)80008-4
19. Tavşancıl, E. (2018). Measuring the attitudes and data analysis via SPSS. Ankara: Nobel Academy Pub.
20. Şimşek ÖF., Introduction to Structural Equation Models: Basic Principles and LISTREL Applications. İstanbul, Ekinoks Pub; 2007.
21. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2012). Scientific Research Methods. Ankara: Pegem Academy; 2012.
22. Phelan, H., Lange, K., Cengiz, E., Gallego, P., Majaliwa, E., Pelicand, J., Smart, C., & Hofer, S. E. (2018). ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: Diabetes education in children and adolescents. Pediatric diabetes, 19 Suppl 27, 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12762
23. Esin, MN. (2015). Data Collection Methods and Tools & Reliability and Validity of Data Collection Tools..In: Erdoğan S, Nahcivan N, Esin MN, editors. Research process, practice and critical in nursing. 2nd Edition. Istanbul: Nobel Medical Bookstores; 2015. 193–234.
24. Acemoğlu, H. & Aktürk, Z. (2012). Reliability and validity in medical research . Dicle Tıp Dergisi , 39 (2) , 316-319 . doi: 10.5798/diclemedj.0921.2012.02.0150