DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A QUESTIONNAIRE THAT SURVEYED DENTAL ASSISTANTS’ KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE AND PRACTICES OF INFECTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL MEASURES WITHIN SOUTH AFRICAN ORAL HEALTHCARE FACILITIES

Abstract

Objective: In-depth research was conducted to find a suitable tool for measuring the knowledge, attitude, and practice of infection prevention and control (IPC) among dental assistants within oral healthcare facilities (OHCFs) in South Africa. However, the results were unsatisfactory, indicating the need to develop and validate a unique questionnaire for this purpose. This article explains the process followed to develop and validate a questionnaire designed to survey knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) in Health Sciences. Methods: To develop and validate a questionnaire, the researcher conducted a literature review to understand the process involved. The initial version of the questionnaire was then drafted. In order to assess its reliability and validity, both objective and subjective evaluations were conducted. A total of 25 individuals formed part of the respective review panels, including five academics, two infection prevention and control experts, five dentists, seven oral hygienists, and six dental assistants from public and private OHCFs. These individuals performed the subjective evaluations of the draft questionnaire. The draft questionnaire was then administered to a group of 60 dental students from the Central University of Technology (CUT). The data obtained from this group enabled the researcher to perform further objective evaluations by applying statistical measures using a Microsoft Excel programme. The reliability of items in the Knowledge domain was determined by the Kuder Richardson (KR20) test, with Cronbach’s alpha applied to items within the Attitude and Practice domains. A conservative approach to the interrater agreement (IRA) assessed the overall reliability. A panel of reviewers determined the face validity. Content validity was determined by the average congruency percentage (ACP), item content validity (I-CVI) and scale content validity (S-CVI). Results: The final questionnaire addressed seven IPC themes and encompassed 188 items. The tests to determine the instrument’s reliability yielded satisfactory results. The KR-20 score ranged between 0.94 and 0.65. The Cronbach’s alpha for items probing Attitude ranged between 0.99 and 0.86, and Cronbach’s alpha for items investigating IPC practices ranged between 0.97 and 0.69. The alternative approach to the IRA yielded 91%, and the conservative approach was 74%. Similarly, the tests to determine the validity of the questionnaire also yielded satisfactory results, with an ACP of 94%, above 90% I-CVI for readability, clarity, and feasibility and the S-CVI of 74%. Conclusion: The results of the reliability and validity tests confirmed that the questionnaire is suitable to measure the IPC knowledge, attitude, and practice of dental assistants.