Moral sensitivity of nursing students: Adaptation and validation of the Campillo's tool

Identificador:  imarina:9432976

Handle: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11797/imarina9432976

Autors:  Roldan-Merino, Juan; Jimenez-Herrera, Maria F; Font-Jimenez, Isabel; Bazo-Hernandez, Leticia; Hurtado-Pardos, Barbara; Campillo-Zaragoza, Beatriz; Biurrun-Garrido, Ainoa

Resum:
Aim: Analyse the psychometric properties of the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire in nursing care and to examine the level of moral sensitivity among nursing students in Spain. Background: Ethical sensitivity is essential in nursing for patient care and decision-making. Assessing nursing students' moral sensitivity aids in developing training strategies for improved care. Design: The study was conducted in two phases: (1) analysis of psychometric properties involving nursing students; and (2) a cross-sectional study design. Method: The study included 611 Spanish nursing students, recruited through non-probability sampling. A selfreport questionnaire, socio-demographic data and the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire were used for data collection. To assess the psychometric properties, both confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory factor analysis were performed. Data were analysed using Student's t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Pearson correlation. Data analysis was performed using SPSS for Windows v28, with a significance level set at p < 0.05. Results: The study included 611 nursing students. The adjustment indices of the exploratory factor analysis indicate an excellent fit when items 18, 20 and 21 are grouped in Dimension 1, contrary to the proposal made by Campillo et al. The questionnaire demonstrated high reliability and validity. Second-year students and those from the SJD Campus showed higher moral sensitivity. No differences were found based on work experience. Conclusion: This study validated the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire for nursing students, revealing its reliability. Early ethical training enhanced moral sensitivity, particularly in second-year students, while institutional values and campus focus significantly influenced scores. Gender and experience were negligible.