【摘要】 目的 编制血液系统恶性肿瘤(hematological malignant, HM)患者跌倒风险评估量表并检验其信效度。方法 基于SHEL模型，采用文献回顾、半结构式访谈，初步拟定HM患者跌倒风险评估量表条目池；通过2轮德尔菲专家函询及预调查，形成初始量表。于2024年5—8月，采用便利抽样法选取广东省广州市某三级甲等医院HM患者作为研究对象，进行量表的项目分析及信效度分析。结果 共放发问卷495份，回收有效问卷487份，有效回收率98.38%。2轮函询专家积极度均为100%;专家权威系数分别为0.91、0.92;专家肯德尔和谐系数分别为0.169、0.286(均P<0.001)。最终形成的量表包括个体特征、生理环境、社会支持和硬件装置4个维度，23个条目。量表水平的内容效度指数为0.91,探索性因子分析提取4个公因子，累计方差贡献率为60.92%;验证性因子分析结果显示模型拟合较好；条目水平的内容效度指数为0.78～1.00;量表总的Cronbach′s α系数为0.90,分半信度系数为0.76。危险程度分级结果显示，得分为44～51分为低危等级；52～63分为中危等级；>63分为高危等级。结论 本量表的编制过程科学、规范，量表具有良好的信效度，可作为医护人员评估HM患者跌倒风险的工具。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To develop a falls risk assessment scale for patients with hematological malignant(HM) and test its reliability and validity.Methods Based on the SHEL model, literature review and semi-structured interviews were used to initially develop a pool of entries for the falls risk assessment scale for HM patients; the initial scale was formed through 2 rounds of Delphi expert correspondence and pre-surveys.From May to August 2024, patients with HM in a tertiary hospital in Guangzhou, Guangdong, were selected as the study subjects by convenience sampling method for item analysis and reliability and validity analysis of the scale.Results A total of 495 questionnairs were distributed and 487 valid questionnaires were collected, yielding a response rate of 98.38%. Expert participation rates in both rounds of correspondence were 100%; expert authority coefficients were 0.91 and 0.92, respectively; expert Kendall’s coefficient of harmony was 0.169 and 0.286, respectively(both P<0.001).The final scale consists of 4 dimensions: individual characteristics, physiological environment, social support, and hardware facilities, with a total of 23 items.The scale demonstrated a content validity index(CVI) of 0.91 at the scale level. Exploratory factor analysis extracted 4 common factors explaining 60.92% of cumulative variance. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated good model fit. Item-level CVI ranged from 0.78 to 1.00. The overall Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.90, with a split-half reliability coefficient of 0.76. Risk level classification results indicated that scores of 44-51 represented low-risk level; scores of 52-63 represented moderate-risk level; and scores>63 represented high-risk level.Conclusion The development process of this scale is scientific and rigorous. The scale demonstrates good reliability and validity, and can be used as a tool for healthcare professionals to assess the risk of falls in patients with HM.更多还原