KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / CURARE Journal of Nursing / 2026 / Sayı: 10

Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of the Nurses' Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale

Abdülmenef Adanır(All Ireland Institute of Hospice and Palliative Care (AIIHPC), Research Support and Knowledge Translation Lead,)0000-0002-7974-7718
Büşra Ertuğrul(All Ireland Institute of Hospice and Palliative Care (AIIHPC), Research Support and Knowledge Translation Lead)0000-0001-6671-3693
Dilek Özden(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF NURSING)0000-0001-8139-5558
Sayfa
31–40
Yayın Tarihi
2026-04-24
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Nurses’ Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and cultural relevance, indicating that it is a valid and reliable tool for assessing ethical dilemmas in geriatric nursing care, while cross-cultural comparison of subscale scores should be interpreted with caution.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Within the Turkish cultural context, nurses experience ethical dilemmas related to respecting elderly patients’ needs, wishes, values, and decision-making processes, while balancing family expectations, autonomy, patient safety, and institutional responsibilities during physical restraint decisions.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Data were collected from 167 nurses using a descriptive characteristics form and the adapted scale.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Nurses’ Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and cultural relevance, indicating that it is a valid and reliable tool for assessing ethical dilemmas in geriatric nursing care, while cross-cultural comparison of subscale scores should be interpreted with caution.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Physical restraint · Elderly · Nursing ethics

Abstract

Objective: Within the Turkish cultural context, nurses experience ethical dilemmas related to respecting elderly patients’ needs, wishes, values, and decision-making processes, while balancing family expectations, autonomy, patient safety, and institutional responsibilities during physical restraint decisions. This study aimed to adapt the Nurses’ Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale into Turkish and to evaluate its psychometric properties in terms of validity and reliability. Methods: A methodological, descriptive, and correlational design was used. Data were collected from 167 nurses using a descriptive characteristics form and the adapted scale. Analyses included exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, item–total correlations, and test–retest reliability. Results: The Turkish version of the scale, consisting of four factors and 17 items, demonstrated strong psychometric validity comparable to the original version. The total explained variance was 65.09%, all factor loadings exceeded 0.30, and RMSEA was below 0.05. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.75 for the total scale and ranged from 0.81 to 0.93 for the subdimensions. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Nurses’ Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and cultural relevance, indicating that it is a valid and reliable tool for assessing ethical dilemmas in geriatric nursing care, while cross-cultural comparison of subscale scores should be interpreted with caution.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Adanır, A., Ertuğrul, B., Özden, D. (2026). Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of the Nurses' Ethical Dilemma for Physically Restrained Elderly Patients Scale. CURARE Journal of Nursing, Sayı: 10, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.26650/CURARE.2026.1807477

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (47)

  1. Cho E, Lee T, Sunwoo D, et al. Use of physical restraints on older adults in South Korean nursing homes and associated factors. Sci Rep. 2024;14:50897.
  2. Fariña-López E, Estévez-Guerra GJ, Polo-Luque ML, Pogrányivá AH, Penelo E. Physical restraint use with elderly patients. Nurs Res. 2018;67(1):55–59.
  3. Smithard D, Randhawa R. Physical restraint in the critical care unit: A narrative review. New Bioeth. 2022;28(1):68–82.
  4. Lee DCA, Robins LM, Bell JS, Srikanth V, Möhler R, Hill KD, et al. Prevalence and variability in use of physical and chemical restraints in residential aged care facilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud, (2021);117, 103856.
  5. Lim SC, Poon WH. Restraint use in the management of the elderly with dementia in hospitals. Intern Med Res Open J, (2016);1(2), 1–4.
  6. Said AA, Kautz DD. Reducing restraint use for older adults in acute care. Nursing (Lond). 2013;43(12):59–61.
  7. Soeno S, Takada T, Takeshima T, Kaneyama M, Sagawa M, Hayashi M, et al. Association between the use of physical restraint and functional decline among older inpatients admitted with pneumonia in an acute care hospital: A retrospective cohort study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, (2021);94, 104330.
  8. Canzan F, Palese A, et al. Nurses’ views on the use of physical restraints in intensive care: A qualitative study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(18):9646.
  9. Goethals S, Dierckx de Casterlé B, & Gastmans C. Nurses’ decision-making process in cases of physical restraint in acute elderly care: A qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud, (2013);50(5), 603–612.
  10. Haahr A, Norlyk A, Martinsen B, & Dreyer P. Nurses’ experiences of ethical dilemmas: A review. Nurs Ethics, (2020);27(1), 258–272.
  11. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications; 2018.
  12. Yamamoto M, Mizuno S, & Aota M. Ethical dilemma factors regarding physical restraints for elderly patients: Experiences of female nurses living with older adults. Int J Clin Med, (2012);3(5), 328–336.
  13. Andersson U, Fathollahi J, & Gustin LW. Nurses’ experiences of informal coercion on adult psychiatric wards. Nurs Ethics, (2020);27(3), 741–753.
  14. Craven RH, Henshaw CM, Rassilyer-Bomers R. Craven & Hirnle’s Fundamentals of Nursing: Concepts and Competencies for Practice (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2023.
  15. Zheng C, Li S, Chen Y, Ye J, Xiao A, Xia Z, et al. Ethical considerations on the use of seclusion in mental health services. Int J Nurs Sci, (2020);7(1), 116–120.
  16. Smithard D, & Randhawa R. Physical restraint in the critical care unit: A narrative review. New Bioeth. 2022;28(1):68–82.
  17. Shanahan DJ. Bedrails and vulnerable older adults: How should nurses make ‘safe and sound’ decisions surrounding their use? Int J Older People Nurs, (2012);7(4), 272–281.
  18. Carrero-Planells A, Urrutia-Beaskoetxea A, & Moreno-Mulet C. The use of physical restraints on geriatric patients: Culture and attitudes among healthcare professionals at intermediate care hospitals in Majorca. Int J Environ Res Public Health, (2021);18(14), 7509.
  19. Choe K, Kang Y, & Park Y. Moral distress in critical care nurses: A phenomenological study. J Adv Nurs, (2015);71(7), 1684–1693.
  20. Gürbüz S, & Şahin F. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri: Felsefe, yöntem, analiz (4. baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  21. Kim K, Han Y, & Kim JS. Korean nurses’ ethical dilemmas, professional values, and professional quality of life. Nurs Ethics, (2015);22(4), 467–478.
  22. Yönt GH, Korhan EA, Dizer B, Gümüş F, & Koyuncu R. (2014). Examination of ethical dilemmas experienced by adult intensive care unit nurses in physical restraint practices. Holist Nurs Pract, (2014);28(2), 85–90.
  23. Şencan H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  24. Akansel N. Physical restraint practices among ICU nurses in one university hospital in western Turkey. Health Sci J, (2007);1(1), 51–57.
  25. Balci H, & Arslan S. Nurses’ information, attitude and practices towards use of physical restraint in intensive care units. J Caring Sci, (2018);7, 75–83.
  26. Ertuğrul B, & Özden D. Nurses’ knowledge and attitudes regarding physical restraint in Turkish intensive care units. Nurs Crit Care, (2021);26(4), 253–261.
  27. Karagözoğlu Ş, & Özden D. Knowledge and practices of nurses working at a university hospital related to use of physical restraints. Turk J Res Dev Nurs, (2013);15(2), 15–23.
  28. Karagözoğlu Ş, & Özden D. Effects of training on nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to the use of physical restraint. Turk J Res Dev Nurs, (2014);15(3), 21–30.
  29. Tavşancıl E. (2006). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi (3. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  30. Paslı Gürdoğan E, Uğur E, Kınıcı E, Aksoy B. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nurses in intensive care units on physical restraint use and factors affecting nurses’ decisions to use them. J Crit Intensive Care. 2016;7(3):83–88.
  31. Brown TA. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  32. Marsh HW, Guo J, Dicke T, Parker PD, & Craven RG. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and set-ESEM: Optimal balance between goodness of fit and parsimony. Multivar Behav Res, (2020);55(1), 102–119.
  33. Soriano K, et al. Development and content validation of the Person-Centered Care Instrument using content validity index (CVI). Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025;15(10):355.
  34. Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quiñonez HR, & Young SL. Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Front Public Health, (2018);6, 149.
  35. Bollen KA. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
  36. Becker J-M, Klein K, Wetzels M. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective, formative, and hierarchical constructs. Long Range Plann. 2015;48(1):1–13.
  37. Podgorica N, Flatscher-Thöni M, Deufert D, Siebert U, &Ganner M. A systematic review of ethical and legal issues in elder care. Nursing Ethics, (2020);28(6), 895-910.
  38. Seçer İ. (2015). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  39. Finch HW. (2019). Exploratory factor analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
  40. Alpar R. (2014). Spor, sağlık ve eğitim bilimlerinden örneklerle uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik güvenirlik: SPSS’de çözümleme adımları ile birlikte (3. baskı). Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  41. Çapık C. Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Anadolu Hemşirelik Sağlık Bilim Derg, (2014);17(3), 196–205.
  42. Erkorkmaz Ü, Etikan Ü, Demir O, Özdamar K, Sanisaoğlu SY. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve uyum indeksleri. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci, (2013);33: 210-23
  43. Salehi Z, Najafi Ghezeljeh T, Hajibabaee F, & Joolaee S. Factors behind ethical dilemmas regarding physical restraint for critical care nurses. Nurs Ethics, (2020);27(2), 598–608.
  44. Büyüköztürk Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (14. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  45. Kalaycı Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri (5. baskı). Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
  46. Tavşancıl E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  47. Noble S, Scheinost D, & Constable RT. A decade of test-retest reliability of functional connectivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroimage, (2019);203, 116157