SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Anestezi ve Cerrahi Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

Psychometric Validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised Short Form (PPCS-R-SF)

Algılanan Perioperatif Yeterlilik Ölçeği – Revize Edilmiş Kısa Formunun (PPCS-R-SF) Psikometrik Geçerliliği

Pınar Tunç Tuna(SELCUK UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-6566-0937
Funda Özpulat(SELCUK UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-1789-6216
Hamide Şişman(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, AKŞEHİR SAĞLIK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-6867-9054
Pages
447–455
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Sample adequacy (KMO=.786) and Bartlett test (p<.001) results showed that the data were suitable for factor analysis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study aims to linguistically adapt the Turkish version of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised Short Form (PPCS-R-SF) and to evaluate its validity and reliability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This methodological study was conducted with 90 nurses working in the surgical units of a university hospital.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Sample adequacy (KMO=.786) and Bartlett test (p<.001) results showed that the data were suitable for factor analysis.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ameliyathane hemşireliği · geçerlilik · güvenirlilik

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to linguistically adapt the Turkish version of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised Short Form (PPCS-R-SF) and to evaluate its validity and reliability. Methods: This methodological study was conducted with 90 nurses working in the surgical units of a university hospital. Data were collected using a Personal Information Form and the PPCS-R-SF, adapted to 18 items to represent clinical practices in Türkiye based on expert panel opinions. Translation-back translation was used for linguistic validity, and the content validity index (CVI) was used for content validity. Construct validity was tested with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and reliability was tested with Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficients. Results: The total Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was found to be . 852; the reliability coefficients of the sub-dimensions ranged from .632 to .769. Sample adequacy (KMO=.786) and Bartlett test (p<.001) results showed that the data were suitable for factor analysis. According to the CFA results, the fit indices (CMIN/DF=1.489, RMSEA=.074, IFI=.901, CFI=.895) proved that the model is verifiable for the Turkish sample. In the gender comparison, female nurses had significantly higher scores than their male colleagues in the "Cooperation" (12.18±1.82) and "Empathy" (12.43±2.22) sub-dimensions (p<.05). Education level and marital status did not appear to create a significant difference in the perception of competence. Conclusions: The Turkish version of the Perioperative Competency Scale–Revised Short Form is a valid and reliable tool for assessing the competencies of perioperative nurses.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, Algılanan Perioperatif Yeterlilik Ölçeği – Revize Edilmiş Kısa Formunun (PPCS-R-SF) Türkçe versiyonunun dilsel olarak uyarlanmasını ve geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğinin değerlendirilmesini amaçlamaktadır. Yöntemler: Bu metodolojik çalışma, bir üniversite hastanesinin cerrahi ünitelerinde çalışan 90 hemşire ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veriler, Kişisel Bilgi Formu ve uzman panel görüşlerine dayanarak Türkiye'deki klinik uygulamaları temsil edecek şekilde 18 maddeye uyarlanmış PPCS-R-SF kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Dilsel geçerlilik için çeviri-geri çeviri, içerik geçerliliği için ise içerik geçerlilik indeksi (CVI) kullanılmıştır. Yapı geçerliliği Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (CFA) ile, güvenilirlik ise Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayıları ile test edilmiştir. Sonuçlar: Ölçeğin toplam Cronbach alfa katsayısı .852 olarak bulunmuştur; Alt boyutların güvenilirlik katsayıları .632 ile .769 arasında değişmiştir. Örneklem yeterliliği (KMO=.786) ve Bartlett testi (p<.001) sonuçları, verilerin faktör analizi için uygun olduğunu göstermiştir. CFA sonuçlarına göre, uyum indeksleri (CMIN/DF=1.489, RMSEA=.074, IFI=.901, CFI=.895), modelin Türk örneklemi için doğrulanabilir olduğunu kanıtlamıştır. Cinsiyet karşılaştırmasında, kadın hemşireler "İşbirliği" (12.18±1.82) ve "Empati" (12.43±2.22) alt boyutlarında erkek meslektaşlarından anlamlı derecede daha yüksek puanlar almıştır (p<.05). Eğitim düzeyi ve medeni durumun, yeterlilik algısında anlamlı bir fark yaratmadığı görülmüştür. Sonuç: Ameliyat Öncesi ve Sonrası Bakım Yeterlilik Ölçeği'nin (Perioperatif Yeterlilik Ölçeği-Revize Edilmiş Kısa Form) Türkçe versiyonu, perioperatif hemşirelerin yeterliliklerini değerlendirmek için geçerli ve güvenilir bir araçtır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tuna, P. T., Özpulat, F., Şişman, H. (2026). Psychometric Validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised Short Form (PPCS-R-SF). Çukurova Anestezi ve Cerrahi Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 447–455. https://doi.org/10.36516/jocass.1902169

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Gillespie BM, Polit DF, Hamlin L, Chaboyer W. Developing a model of competence in the operating theatre: psychometric validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(1):90-101. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.08.001.
  2. Jaensson M, Falk-Brynhildsen K, Gillespie BM, Wallentin FY, Nilsson U. Psychometric validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised in the Swedish context. J Perianesth Nurs. 2018;33(4):499-511. doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2016.11.010.
  3. Gillespie BM, Polit DF, Chaboyer W. The influence of personal characteristics on perioperative nurses' perceived competence: implications for workforce planning. Aust J Adv Nurs. 2013;30(3):14-25. doi:10.37464/2013.303.1616.
  4. McMullan M, Endacott R, Gray MA, Jasper M, Miller CM, Scholes J, et al. Portfolios and assessment of competence: a review of the literature. J Adv Nurs. 2003;41(3):283-294. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02528.x.
  5. Meretoja R, Koponen L. A systematic model to compare nurses’ optimal and actual competencies in the clinical setting. J Adv Nurs. 2012;68(2):414-422. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05777.x.
  6. Al Jabri FYM, Kvist T, Azimirad M, Turunen H. A systematic review of healthcare professionals' core competency instruments. Nurs Health Sci. 2021;23(1):87-102. doi:10.1111/nhs.12767.
  7. Clinton M, Murrells T, Robinson S. Assessing competency in nursing: a comparison of nurses prepared through degree and diploma programmes. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(1):82-94. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01014.x.
  8. Cowan DT, Wilson-Barnett J, Norman IJ, Murrells T. Measuring nursing competence: development of a self-assessment tool for general nurses across Europe. Int J Nurs Stud. 2008;45(6):902-913. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.03.004.
  9. Nilsson J, Johansson E, Egmar AC, Florin J, Leksell J, Lepp M, et al. Development and validation of a new tool measuring nurses' self-reported professional competence—The Nurse Professional Competence (NPC) Scale. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34(4):574-580. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.07.016.
  10. Takase M, Teraoka S. Development of the holistic nursing competence scale. Nurs Health Sci. 2011;13(4):396-403. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2018.2011.00631.x.
  11. Gillespie BM, Chaboyer W, Wallis M, Chang A, Werder H. Managing the list: OR nurses’ dual role of coordinator and negotiator. ACORN. 2009;22(1):5-12.
  12. Gillespie BM, Hamlin L. A synthesis of the literature on “competence” as it applies to perioperative nursing. AORN J. 2009;90(2):245-258. doi:10.1016/j.aorn.2009.02.001.
  13. Sönmez B, Ayoğlu T. Validity and reliability of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised. Nurs Health Sci. 2019;21(4):428-436. doi:10.1111/nhs.12613.
  14. DeVellis RF, Thorpe CT. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2021.
  15. Glasgow RE, Riley WT. Pragmatic measures: what they are and why we need them. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(2):237-243. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.010.
  16. Kemper CJ, Trapp S, Kathmann N, Samuel DB, Ziegler M. Short versus long scales in clinical assessment: exploring the trade-off between resources saved and psychometric quality lost using two measures of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Assessment. 2019;26(5):767-782. doi:10.1177/1073191117711021.
  17. Gillespie BM, Harbeck E, Sutherland-Fraser S, Nicholson P, Boric T. Psychometric validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale–Revised Short Form. J Adv Nurs. 2023;79(12):4732-4746. doi:10.1111/jan.15783.
  18. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6(1):1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
  19. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol Res Online. 2003;8(2):23-74. doi:10.23668/psycharchives.12784.
  20. Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. 24. baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2018.
  21. Mundim GDA, Pires MRGM, Torres MVS, Silveira AO. Analysis of care and gender stereotypes in nursing scientific research: a scoping review. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2024;58:e20240066.
  22. Olgay SŞ, Kırık B, Uğur E, Özkan HA. From classroom to clinic: a qualitative study of gendered experiences among nursing students and educators in Türkiye. BMC Nurs. 2025;24(1):984.
  23. Luciani M, Ardenghi S, Rampoldi G, Russo S, Bani M, Strepparava MG, et al. Caring for nursing students is caring for patients: a multicentre cross-sectional study on the relationship between nursing students' caring and the perception of instructors' caring. Nurse Educ Today. 2024;137:106154.
  24. Terzi B, Kaya N. Ameliyathane hemşirelerinde mesleki profesyonellik ve etkileyen faktörler. Gumushane Univ J Health Sci. 2017;6(4):213-222. doi:10.22275/gsbd.336423.
  25. Ucak A, Cebeci F. Ameliyathane hemşireliğinde yetkinlik: bir kapsam incelemesi. Akdeniz Hemşirelik Dergisi. 2021;1(2):118-128. doi:10.5152/jern.2021.98852.