Italian Validation of the Chiba Interprofessional Competency Scale (CICS29)

Main Article Content

Annalisa Tonarelli
Takeshi Takeshi Yamamoto
Chiara Foà
Alessandra Miraglia Raineri
Giovanna Artioli
Elena Baccarini
Paola Giampellegrini
Itria Masciangelo
Elisa Moggi
Doriana Toni
Luca Valcavi
Leopoldo Sarli

Keywords

interprofessional collaboration, interprofessional competence, health professions, Italian validation, Chiba Inter-professional Competency Scale.

Abstract

Background and aim of the work: The Chiba Inter-professional Competency Scale (CICS29) validated in several languages, it is a self-report instrument that investigates the degree of interprofessional collaboration in six areas: attitudes and beliefs of the professional; ability to manage a work group; actions to achieve goals; providing assistance that respects the patient; attitudes and behaviours that improve the cohesion of the working group; fulfilling or performing the own professional role. In addition to being recent, the scale investigates collaboration among all health professionals, and is not limited to specific professionals. The aim of the study was to validate the Italian version of CICS29. Method: A questionnaire-based study was conducted with an Italian sample consisting of 530 health professionals (419 women¸ mean age = 40 years, SD = 10.7; range 23- 58 years). The internal validity was measured using factor analysis. To verify the convergent validity, the Italian Version of Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey (ICCAS) was correlated with the CICS29; Results: The reliability and the internal validity of the CICS29 revealed 6 factors corresponding to the original subscales. The analysis presents an excellent sample adequacy measure (KMO = .933) with the scores ranging from 0.62 to 0.78 for the interclass correlation coefficients of the 6 domains. A significant level of correlation was found between the subscales of the CICS29 and the ICCAS. Conclusions: In conclusion, the Italian version of CICS29 has a satisfactory level of reliability and validity and it is recommended for measuring interprofessional collaboration of the health professionals. (www.actabiomedica.it)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Abstract 161 | PDF Downloads 132

References

1. Artioli G, Cosentino C, Foà C, Sarli, L. Inter-Professionalism in Health Care Post-graduate specialization: an innovative Laboratory. Acta BioMed Ateneo Parmense 2019; 90(4): 8-16.
2. Van der Biezen M, Wensing M, Poghosyan L, van der Burgt R, Laurant M. Collaboration in teams with nurse practitioners and general practitioners during out-of-hours and implications for patient care; a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17.1: 589.
3. Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V, Guruge S, Gamage B, Espin, S. Interprofessional work in operating rooms: a qualitative study from Sri Lanka. BMC surgery 2016; 16(1): 61.
4. World Health Organization, et al. Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. World Health Organization, 2010.
5. Robben S, Perry M, van Nieuwenhuijzen L, van Achterberg T, Rikkert MO, Schers H et al. Impact of interprofessional education on collaboration attitudes, skills, and behavior among primary care professionals. J Contin Educ Health 2012; 32(3): 196-204.
6. Gilbert J HV, Jean Y, Hoffman SJ. A WHO report: framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. J Allied Health 2010; 39(3): 196-197.
7. Gray, Barbara. Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1989.
8. Hellman T, Jensen I, Orchard C, Bergström G. Preliminary testing of the Swedish version of the Assessment of Interprofessional Team Collaboration Scale (AITCS-S). J interprofessional care 2016; 30(4): 499-504.
9. Condotta A, Benetton M. The doctor-nurse collaboration, A bibliographic study [In Italian]. Scenario 2007; 24(4): 10–17.
10. Oandasan Ivy F; Ross Baker G; Barker K, Bosco C. Teamwork in health care: promoting effective teamwork in healthcare in Canada: Policy synthesis and recommendations. Canadian Health Services Res. Found. 2006.
11. Brolis R, Postal N, Povoli R. Working in groups: the collaboration between doctors and nurses. Nurs Res Assistance 2006; 25(2): 84–87.
12. Dougherty MB, Larson E. A review of instruments measuring nurse-physician collaboration. JONA: The J Nurs Adm 2005; 35(5): 244-253.
13. Mancini T, Sarli L, Caricati L, Sollami A. Interprofessional collaboration in health care: An analysis through the theory of social identity (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). University of Parma, Parma 2017.
14. Weiss SJ, Davis HP. Validity and reliability of the Collaborative Practice Scales. Nurs Res 1985; 34: 299–305.
15. Baggs, JG. Development of an instrument to measure collaboration and satisfaction about care decisions. J Adv Nurs 1994; 20(1): 176–182.
16. Archibald D, Trumpower D, MacDonald CJ. Validation of the interprofessional collaborative competency attainement survey (ICCAS). J Inter Care 2014; 28(6): 553-558.
17. Volta B, Losi E. How to work on interprofessional objectives. Unpublished Master’s Degree in Case Care Management in the Hospital and Territory for the health professions 2017 Parma: University of Parma.
18. Sakai I, Yamamoto T, Takahashi Y, Maeda T, Kunii Y, Kurokochi K. Development of a new measurement scale for interprofessional collaborative competency: The Chiba Interprofessional Competency Scale (CICS29). J Inter Care 2017; 31(1): 59–65.
19. Schmitz CC, Radosevich DM, Jardine P, MacDonald J, Trumpower D, Archibald D. The Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey (ICCAS): A replication validation study. J Inter Care 2017; 31(1): 28–34.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>