Developing and evaluating a Disaster Management Assessment Tool for Health Care Practitioners

Over the last fifty years, the frequency and intensity of disasters have escalated, highlighting the importance of healthcare practitioners (HCPs) being thoroughly prepared for disaster management. Despite this pressing need, there is a notable lack of well-developed and rigorously evaluated assessment tools to evaluate disaster preparedness among HCPs across various disciplines and disaster scenarios. This study aims to develop and evaluate a Disaster Management Assessment Tool for Health Care Practitioners (DMAT_HCP).

The DMAT_HCP was designed following the four stages of the Disaster Management Framework and a literature review of similar previously validated tools. Content validity was assessed through two rounds of review by nine and six experts, whereas face validity was assessed by 11 HCPs. DMAT_HCP was tested on 107 HCPs from different health disciplines and settings to evaluate the structural (factor analysis) and construct (convergent and divergent) validities as well as internal consistency reliability.

DMAT_HCP comprised five Likert scales that assess the preparedness and readiness of HCPs for disaster, with satisfactory content validity indices (CVI > 0.83 for six experts). Factor analysis of the entire set of DMAT_HCP items suggested six factors: knowledge, two sub-domains of attitude, practice, willingness to practice, and organization-based management, which together accounted for 77.9% of the variance in the data. Convergent and divergent validity analyses showed that all items within a section had a correlation coefficient greater than 0.4 with their corresponding section score, and they were more strongly correlated with their own section than with scores from other sections. Cronbach's alpha values for the individual sections ranged from 0.89 (attitude) to 0.97 (organization-based management), and the overall Cronbach's alpha for the DMAT_HCP was 0.90.

This study substantiated that DMAT_HCP is both conceptually and methodologically valid and reliable. It has demonstrated strong content validity, accurately measures the intended constructs, and effectively distinguishes between unrelated constructs. The tool also exhibited excellent internal consistency reliability across its components. The tool offers a comprehensive, globally applicable assessment of disaster management, suitable for use across various healthcare professions, settings, disaster contexts, and management phases.