IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p12678-d932995.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development, Validity, and Reliability of the Perceived Telemedicine Importance, Disadvantages, and Barriers (PTIDB) Questionnaire for Egyptian Healthcare Professionals

Author

Listed:
  • Naglaa Youssef

    (Department of Medical-Surgical Nursing, College of Nursing, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ramy Mohamed Ghazy

    (Tropical Health Department, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Alexandria 21561, Egypt)

  • Reem Ezzat Mahdy

    (Department of Internal Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut 71515, Egypt)

  • Mohammad Abdalgabar

    (Department of Gastroenterology, Police Authority Hospital, Giza 0000, Egypt)

  • Omar Elshaarawy

    (Hepatology and Gastroenterology Department, National Liver Institute, Menoufia University, Menofia 32511, Egypt)

  • Mohamed Alboraie

    (Department of Internal Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo 11884, Egypt)

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to develop and investigate the psychometric properties of the Perceived Telemedicine Importance, Disadvantages, and Barriers (PTIDB) questionnaire for healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Egypt. This study was conducted in three phases: (1) development of the questionnaire, (2) preliminary testing of the questionnaire, and (3) investigation of its validity and reliability using a large survey. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted over two months. A convenience sample of 691 HCPs and clerks from 22 governorates accessed the online survey. The construct validity was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and internal reliability. Results: The initial Eigenvalues showed that all 19 items of the questionnaire explained 56.0% of the variance in three factors. For Factor 1 (importance), eight items were loaded on one factor, with factor loading ranging from 0.61 to 0.78. For Factor 2 (disadvantages), seven items were loaded on one factor with factor loading ranging from 0.60 to 0.79. For Factor 3 (barriers), four items were loaded on one factor, with factor loading ranging from 0.60 to 0.86. The CFA showed that All loadings ranged from 0.4 to 1.0, with CFI = 0.93 and RMSEA = 0.061. All the factors had satisfactory reliability; 0.87 for ‘‘Importance’’, 0.82 for ‘‘Disadvantages’’, and 0.79 for ‘‘Barriers’’. Conclusion: The PTIDB questionnaire has an acceptable level of validity and internal consistency, at a readability level of 12th grade. The retest reliability, however, still needs to be tested.

Suggested Citation

  • Naglaa Youssef & Ramy Mohamed Ghazy & Reem Ezzat Mahdy & Mohammad Abdalgabar & Omar Elshaarawy & Mohamed Alboraie, 2022. "Development, Validity, and Reliability of the Perceived Telemedicine Importance, Disadvantages, and Barriers (PTIDB) Questionnaire for Egyptian Healthcare Professionals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12678-:d:932995
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12678/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12678/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12678-:d:932995. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.