ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the pre-existing global crisis of physician burnout. Physician and particularly medical educator well-being, has come into focus as educators can influence their own and learners' well-being. Measuring this construct is one important step towards promoting well-being in the work and learning environments. The 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) has been validated in different populations worldwide for assessing well-being. Yet, its psychometric acceptability remains unexplored among medical educators in Asia including Hong Kong (HK). This study evaluates the validity of the WHO-5 when used among HK medical educators. METHOD: Using data from 435 medical educators, we employed combined within-network (confirmatory factor analysis; CFA) and between-network approaches (correlation and regression) to scale validation. RESULTS: CFA results indicated that our data fit the a priori WHO-5 model, suggesting structural validity. Results of comparison of means indicated no gender differences, but there were significant differences when participants were compared by age and professional backgrounds. Resilience predicted well-being as measured by the WHO-5, suggesting construct criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings extend the validity evidence for the WHO-5 to HK medical educators examined in this study. This enables their well-being to be assessed when evaluating the impact of future well-being programmes.
Subject(s)
Faculty, Medical , Mental Health , Surveys and Questionnaires , COVID-19/epidemiology , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Faculty, Medical/psychology , Hong Kong/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Reproducibility of Results , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
The Students' Perceptions of Physician-Pharmacist Interprofessional Clinical Education and its revision (SPICE, SPICE-R) were designed to understand medicine and pharmacy students' perceptions of interprofessional education and collaborative practice in managing complex health problems. The SPICE-R authors, however, suggested for additional items for subscales "roles and responsibilities for collaborative care" and "patient outcomes from collaborative practice". We added two items and introduced SPICE-R3 to differentiate it from the 10-item SPICE-R2 and to adapt the scale to a wider range of healthcare members. We administered the SPICE-R3 to healthcare students at the height of the COVID-19 outbreak in Hong Kong in February 2020. Using data from 225 students from Chinese medicine, medicine, nursing, and pharmacy, confirmatory factor analysis indicated nine items having acceptable item coefficients. Our data obtained a good fit to the three-factor, nine-item model suggesting construct validity. Results of the between-network analysis suggest that the three subscales of SPICE-R3 correlated systematically with other theoretically relevant variables in the nomological network suggesting convergent validity. The SPICE-R3 is a valid measure to examine Hong Kong healthcare students' interprofessional attitudes in online interprofessional education even during the pandemic. Implications and directions for future research are provided.