Xiao-Hong Wu,1,2,* Yu Xiao,3,4,* Xi-Sui Chen5 

1Nursing Department, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China; 2School of Nursing, Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, People’s Republic of China; 3Psychosomatic Medical Center, The Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, MOE Key Laboratory for Neuroinformation, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China; 4Psychosomatic Medical Center, The Fourth People’s Hospital of Chengdu, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China; 5Nursing Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, People’s Republic of China

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Correspondence: Xi-Sui Chen, Email zdfsichuan@126.com

Objective: This study aimed to develop the Chinese version of the totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) self-management behavior scale for patients with cancer to provide a reliable tool for medical staff to judge patients with TIVAP self-management behavior.
Methods: This study employed a mixed-method exploratory design. The initial scale was developed through a literature review, expert meetings, and two-round Delphi expert consultation. The reliability indicators included retest reliability and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. The validity indicators included content, construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were employed for the validity analysis; 22 venous therapy experts participated in the Delphi expert consultation. A total of 500 patients were recruited from two third-class A hospitals in Guangdong Province, China, between July 2020 and January 2021 to test reliability and validity. A convenience sampling method was adopted.
Results: The final scale comprised seven dimensions and 29 items. The content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.990. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and retest reliability of the scale were 0.931 and 0.900, respectively. The EFA results indicated a seven-factor structure, accounting for 65.68% of the total data variance. The results of the CFA showed that the CMIN/DF value was 2.348; the root mean square error of approximation value was 0.06; and the values of comparative fit index, incremental fit index, and Tucker–Lewis index were all > 0.90. The factor loadings for all the items were > 0.50, the composite reliability value was > 0.70, and the average variance extracted (AVE) value was > 0.50. Moreover, all absolute values of the correlation coefficients were less than the square root of the AVE for the seven dimensions. The total scores between the health promoting lifestyle profile-II revise (HPLP-IIR) and CPTSMBS were positively correlated (r = 0.465, p < 0.01).
Conclusion: The scale demonstrated good reliability and validity and can be applied in clinical practice to evaluate self-management behavior among patients using a TIVAP.

Keywords: totally implantable venous access port, TIVAP, reliability, validity, scale, self-management