Clinical decision making: validation of the nursing anxiety and self-confidence with clinical decision making scale...

Decision making is a pivotal component of nursing education worldwide. This study aimed to accomplish objectives: (1) Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making (NASC-CDM©) scale from English to Spanish; (2) Comparison of nursing student groups by academic years; and (3) Analysis of the impact of work experience on decision making.

Cross-sectional comparative study. A convenience sample comprising 301 nursing students was included. Cultural adaptation and validation involved a rigorous process encompassing translation, back-translation, expert consultation, pilot testing, and psychometric evaluation of reliability and statistical validity. The NASC-CDM© scale consists of two subscales: self-confidence and anxiety, and 3 dimensions: D1 (Using resources to gather information and listening fully), D2 (Using information to see the big picture), and D3 (Knowing and acting). To assess variations in self-confidence and anxiety among students, the study employed the following tests: Analysis of Variance tests, homogeneity of variance, and Levene's correction with Tukey's post hoc analysis.

Validation showed high internal consistency reliability for both scales: Cronbach's α = 0.920 and Guttman's λ2 = 0.923 (M = 111.32, SD = 17.07) for self-confidence, and α = 0.940 and λ2 = 0.942 (M = 80.44, SD = 21.67) for anxiety; and comparative fit index (CFI) of: 0.981 for self-confidence and 0.997 for anxiety. The results revealed a significant and gradual increase in students' self-confidence (p =.049) as they progressed through the courses, particularly in D2 and D3. Conversely, anxiety was high in the 1st year (M = 81.71, SD = 18.90) and increased in the 3rd year (M = 86.32, SD = 26.38), and significantly decreased only in D3. Work experience positively influenced self-confidence in D2 and D3 but had no effect on anxiety.

The Spanish version (NASC-CDM-S©) was confirmed as a valid, sensitive, and reliable instrument, maintaining structural equivalence with the original English version. While the students' self-confidence increased throughout their training, their levels of anxiety varied. Nevertheless, these findings underscored shortcomings in assessing and identifying patient problems.