Factor Structure, Psychometric Properties, and Measurement Invariance of the Pandemic Experiences and Perceptions Scale Among Italian Hospital Workers
Main Article Content
Keywords
Psychometrics, Pandemic Experiences and Perceptions Scale, measurement invariance, exploratory structural equation modelling, COVID-19 pandemic
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic represented substantial risks to hospital workers’ physical and mental health. The availability of validated measures on the impact of the pandemic on workplaces is crucial for developing data-driven interventions. The primary purpose of our study was to translate it into Italian and assess factor structure, psychometric properties, and measurement invariance of the Pandemic Experiences and Perceptions Scale (PEPS). Methods: The survey was completed by 766 workers from an Italian hospital. We examined the internal structure of the PEPS using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) techniques and testing the invariance for clinical vs. nonclinical workers. Results: The six-factor ESEM solution showed an excellent fit to the data (CFI=0.956, TLI=0.932, RMSEA=0.050), supporting the superiority of the ESEM solution. The factorial invariance of the PEPS across occupational roles (clinical vs. nonclinical hospital workers) was supported, and the ESEM-based McDonald’s omega was good for all factors.Conclusions: The results from this study provided evidence for the factorial validity, reliability, and measurement invariance across occupational roles of the Italian version of the PEPS. Thus, the Italian version of the PEPS is a reliable and valid tool for assessing pandemic experiences and perceptions among Italian workers.
References
2. Downey E, Fokeladeh HS, Catton H. What the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed: The findings of five global health workforce professions. Published online 2023.
3. World Health Organization. The Impact of COVID-19 on Health and Care Workers: A Closer Look at Deaths. World Health Organization; 2021.
4. Purkayastha D, Vanroelen C, Bircan T, Vantyghem MA, Gantelet Adsera C. Work, health and Covid‑19: a literature review. ETUI Research Paper-Report. Published online 2021.
5. Chemali S, Mari-Sáez A, El Bcheraoui C, Weishaar H. Health care workers’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. HRH. 2022;20(1):27. Doi: 10.1186/s12960-022-00724-1
6. Dzinamarira T, Nkambule SJ, Hlongwa M, et al. Risk Factors for COVID-19 Infection Among Healthcare Workers. A First Report From a Living Systematic Review and meta-Analysis. Saf Health Work. 2022;13(3):263-268. Doi: 10.1016/j.shaw.2022.04.001
7. Chutiyami M, Cheong AMY, Salihu D, et al. COVID-19 Pandemic and Overall Mental Health of Healthcare Professionals Globally: A Meta-Review of Systematic Reviews. Front Psychiatry. 2022;12. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.804525
8. Doleman G, De Leo A, Bloxsome D. The impact of pandemics on healthcare providers’ workloads: A scoping review. J Adv Nurs. 2023;79(12):4434-4454. Doi: 10.1111/jan.15690
9. Ching SM, Ng KY, Lee KW, et al. Psychological distress among healthcare providers during COVID-19 in Asia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one. 2021;16(10):e0257983.
10. Shreffler J, Petrey J, Huecker M. The Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Worker Wellness: A Scoping Review. West J Emerg Med. 2020;21(5):1059-1066. Doi: 10.5811/westjem.2020.7.48684
11. Søvold LE, Naslund JA, Kousoulis AA, et al. Prioritizing the Mental Health and Well-Being of Healthcare Workers: An Urgent Global Public Health Priority. Front Public Health. 2021;9:679397. Doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.679397
12. Ahorsu DK, Lin CY, Imani V, Saffari M, Griffiths MD, Pakpour AH. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale: Development and Initial Validation. Int J Ment HEalth Addict. 2022;20(3):1537-1545. Doi: 10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8
13. Lee SA, Mathis AA, Jobe MC, Pappalardo EA. Clinically significant fear and anxiety of COVID-19: A psychometric examination of the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale. Psychiatry Res. 2020;290:113112. Doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113112
14. Feng L sen, Dong Z jiao, Yan R yu, et al. Psychological distress in the shadow of the COVID-19 pandemic: Preliminary development of an assessment scale. Psychiatry Res. 2020;291:113202. Doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113202
15. Leiter M. The Pandemic Experiences and Perceptions Survey (PEPS). Group report. Published online 2020:1-57.
16. Leiter MP, Maslach C. AREAS OF WORKLIFE: A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO ORGANIZATIONAL PREDICTORS OF JOB BURNOUT. Vol 3.; 2003:134. Doi: 10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03003-8
17. Leiter MP, Maslach C. Six areas of worklife: A model of the organizational context of burnout. JHHSA. 1999;21(4):472-489.
18. AlMulla M. A measurement of radiographers pandemic experiences & perceptions survey (PEPS) during the coronavirus pandemic in Kuwait. Published online 2020. Doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-43360/v1
19. Al-Wassia R, Mouais A, Kadi M, et al. Knowledge- and Experience-Based Perceptions of Radiation Therapists during the COVID-19 Outbreak. Hospital Topics. 1-13. Doi: 10.1080/00185868.2023.2182245
20. Apaydin EA, Rose DE, Yano EM, et al. Burnout Among Primary Care Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Occup Environ Med. 2021;63(8):642-645. Doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002263
21. Bailey JG, Wong M, Bailey K, et al. Pandemic-related factors predicting physician burnout beyond established organizational factors: cross-sectional results from the COPING survey. Psychol Health Med. 2023;28(8):2353-2367. Doi: 10.1080/13548506.2021.1990366
22. Chami-Malaeb R, Menhem N, Abdulkhalek R. Higher education leadership, quality of worklife and turnover intention among Lebanese academics in COVID-19: a moderated mediation model. EJTD. 2023; ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). Doi: 10.1108/EJTD-01-2023-0006
23. Liu JJW, Nazarov A, Plouffe RA, et al. Exploring the Well-being of Health Care Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocol for a Prospective Longitudinal Study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2021;10(9):e32663. Doi: 10.2196/32663
24. Lucas Fair TB, Wall A. A cross-sectional survey study of the impact of COVID-19 on resident training, education, and lifestyle across multiple surgical specialties in the Baylor Scott and White Health Care System. Bayl Univ Med Cent. 2023;36(3):363-369. Doi: 10.1080/08998280.2023.2171222
25. Mercado M, Wachter K, Schuster RC, et al. A cross-sectional analysis of factors associated with stress, burnout and turnover intention among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Health Soc Care Community. 2022;30(5):e2690-e2701. Doi: 10.1111/hsc.13712
26. Pawlowicz-Szlarska E, Forycka J, Harendarz K, Stanisławska M, Makówka A, Nowicki M. MO921: Pandemic Experiences, Perceptions and Burnout Among Haemodialysis Units Personnel in the COVID-19 Era. NDT. 2022;37(Supplement_3):gfac084-016.
27. Plouffe RA, Nazarov A, Forchuk CA, et al. Impacts of morally distressing experiences on the mental health of Canadian health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2021;12(1):1984667. Doi: 10.1080/20008198.2021.1984667
28. Sims BW, Matos RI, Brendle J, Lock RH. The Impact of Adaptive Leadership on Burnout in Special Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Res Leadersh Educ. Published online April 28, 2023:19427751231168990. Doi: 10.1177/19427751231168990
29. Liu N, Plouffe RA, Liu JJW, et al. Determinants of burnout in Canadian health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2024;15(1):2351782. Doi: 10.1080/20008066.2024.2351782
30. Asparouhov T, Muthén B. Exploratory structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Modeling. 2009;16(3):397-438. Doi: 10.1080/10705510903008204
31. Klotz AC, Swider BW, Kwon SH. Back-translation practices in organizational research: Avoiding loss in translation. J Appl Psychol. 2023;108(5):699-727. Doi: 10.1037/apl0001050
32. Brislin RW. Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research. J Cross-Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185-216. Doi: 10.1177/135910457000100301
33. Morin A, Asparouhov T. Estimation of a hierarchical Exploratory Structural Equation Model (ESEM) using ESEM-within-CFA. Montreal, QC: Substantive Methodological Synergy Research Laboratory. Published online 2018.
34. Muthen LK, Muthen B, Angeles) M& M (Los. Mplus Version 8 User’s Guide. Muthen & Muthen; 2017. https://books.google.it/books?id=dgDlAQAACAAJ
35. Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1993;58:525-543.
36. Hu L tze, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal. 1999;6(1):1-55.
37. Yu CY. Evaluating Cutoff Criteria of Model Fit Indices for Latent Variable Models with Binary and Continuous Outcomes. University of California, Los Angeles; 2002.
38. Asparouhov T, Muthen B. Robust chi square difference testing with mean and variance adjusted test statistics. Published online 2006. http:// www.statmodel.com/download/webnotes/webnote10.pdf
39. Chen FF. Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance. Struct Equ Model. 2007;14(3):464-504. Doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834
40. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance. Struct Equ Model. 2002;9(2):233-255. Doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
41. McDonald RP. The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. Br J Stat Psychol. 1970;23(1):1-21. Doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1970.tb00432.x
42. Hayes AF, Coutts JJ. Use Omega Rather than Cronbach’s Alpha for Estimating Reliability. But…. Commun Methods Meas. 2020;14(1):1-24. Doi: 10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629
43. Morin AJS, Arens AK, Tran A, Caci H. Exploring sources of construct-relevant multidimensionality in psychiatric measurement: A tutorial and illustration using the Composite Scale of Morningness. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2016;25(4):277-288. Doi: 10.1002/mpr.1485
44. Byrne BM, Watkins D. The issue of measurement invariance revisited. J Cross.Cult Psychol. 2003;34(2):155-175.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All Journal's articles are Open Access papers distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
