Korean J Women Health Nurs.  2011 Dec;17(5):463-473. 10.4069/kjwhn.2011.17.5.463.

Psychometric Evaluation of Uterine Cervical Cancer Screening Embarrassment Questionnaire among Korean Women: Complementary Use of Rasch Model

• Cho EJ
• Chung BY
• Lee K
• Consedine
• Lee WK

• KMID: 2308237
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4069/kjwhn.2011.17.5.463

Abstract

PURPOSE
Cervical cancer can be prevented by regular cervical screening. Embarrassment has been reported as one important barrier to cervical screening uptake. The absence of appropriate instrumentation, however, has limited our understanding of the links between embarrassment and health care outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate psychometric attributes of the uterine cervical cancer screening embarrassment questionnaire.
METHODS
A convenience sample for field study was recruited from four gynecological clinics in Gyeongju, Korea. Within a cross-sectional descriptive design, 339 women who had cervical screening completed self-administered measures of embarrassment including a visual analogue, general medical embarrassment, dispositional embarrassment, and Pap smear related negative emotion.
RESULTS
Rasch analysis of items demonstrated the evidence of one-dimensional construct and good 7-point rating scales functioning. Factor analysis revealed that uterine cervical cancer screening embarrassment was comprised of two domains-bodily manifestations and perceiving an undesirable social face. Construct validity was demonstrated by a high subscale-to-subscale correlation. Convergent and discriminant validity was evidenced by significant correlations with a 100 mm VAS scale, general medical embarrassment, and Pap smear related negative emotion. Known-group validity was established by comparing women with high versus low trait embarrassment. Both two sub-scales and overall scale demonstrated good internal reliability.
CONCLUSION
The Uterine uterine cervical cancer screening questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument suited to assessing the manifestations of embarrassment during screening. The use of instrument can be extended to understand the client's embarrassment undergoing health examinations which require the exposure of their private parts.

Keyword

Uterine cervical cancer; Cancer screening; Embarrassment; Questionnaire

MeSH Terms

Delivery of Health Care
Early Detection of Cancer
Female
Humans
Korea
Mass Screening
Psychometrics
Surveys and Questionnaires
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Weights and Measures

Reference

1. Bond T.G., Fox C.M. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. 2001. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

2. Chang S.B., Park S.M. A study on the relationship between emotions related to Pap smear and continuous participation Pap smear screening in married Korean women. Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing. 1999. 5(3):287–297.

3. Cho E.J. Effect of Desexualization Care guided by dramaturgical interaction on women's embarrassment during Uterine cervical cancer screening. 2003. Daegu: The Kyungpook National University of Korea;Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

4. Cho E.J., Chung B.Y. Embarrassment; A concept analysis. Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing. 2002-a. 14(2):276–286.

5. Cho E.J., Chung B.Y. A descriptive survey on women's embarrassability and embarrassment during cervical screening. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2002-b. 32(6):832–843.

6. Consedine N.S., Krivoshekova Y.S., Harris C.R. Bodily embarrassment and judgment concern as separable factors in the measurement of medical embarrassment: Psychometric development and links to treatment-seeking outcomes. British Journal of Health Psychology. 2007. 12:439–462.

7. Consedine N.S., Ladwig I., Reddig M.K., Broadbent E.A. The many faeces of colorectal cancer screening embarrassment: Preliminary psychometric development and links to screening outcome. British Journal of Health Psychology. 2011. 16(3):559–579.

8. Consedine N.S., Reddig M.K., Ladwig I., Broadbent E.A. Gender and ethnic differences in colorectal cancer screening embarrassment and physician gender preferences. Oncology Nursing Forum. 11. 38(6):E409–E417. Retrieved November 22 2011. from http://www.cinahl.com/cgi-bin/refsvc?jid=293&accno=2011334087.

9. Costa M., Dinsbach W., Manstead A.R., Bitti P.R. Social presence, embarrassment, and nonverbal behavior. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 2001. 25(4):225–240.

10. Edelmann R.J. Crozier W.R, editor. Embarrassment and blushing: A component-process model, some initial descriptive data and cross-cultural data. Shyness and embarrassment: Perspectives from social psychology. 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;205–229.

11. Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life. 1959. New York: Doubleday Anchor Book.

12. Goffman E. Interactional ritual; Essays on face-to-face behaviour. 1967. New York: Doubleday Anchor Book.

13. Ha F.I. Embarrassment and face work in Korean social interaction. 2000. Santa Barbara, USA: The University of California;Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

14. Henslin J., Biggs M. Henslin J, editor. Dramaturgical desexualisation: The sociology of the vaginal examination. Studies in the Sociology of Sex. 1971. New York: Appleton Century Crofts;136–160.

15. Kelly K.M., Jones W.H. Assessment of dispositional embarrassability. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping. 1997. 10:307–333.

16. Keltner D. Ekman P., Rosenberg E, editors. Signs of appeasement: Evidence for distinct displays of embarrassment, amusement, and shame. What the face reveals: Basic and applied studies of spontaneous expression using the facial action coding system (FACS). 1997. Oxford: Oxford University Press;133–160.

17. Kim H., Lee K., Lee S., Kim S. Uterine cervical cancer screening in Korean American women: Findings from focus group interviews. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2004. 34(4):617–624.

18. Ko Y., Malone D.C., D'Agostino J.V., Skrepnek G.H., Armstrong E.P., Brown M., Woosley R.L. Potential determinants of prescribers' drug-drug interaction knowledge. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy. 2008. 4(4):355–366.

19. Leary M.R., Kowalski R.M. Social anxiety: Self-Presentational disasters. 1995. New York: Guilford Press.

20. Linacre J.M., Wright B.D. WINSTEPS.Rasch-Model [computer program]. 1991. Chicago: MESA Press.

21. Linacre J.M. What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions. 2002. 16(2):878.

22. Lodge N., Mallet. J., Blake P., Fryatt I. A study to ascertain gynecological patient's perceived levels of embarrassment with physical and psychological care given by female and male nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1997. 25:893–907.

23. Lynn M.R. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research. 1986. 35(6):382–385.

24. Moettus A., Sklar D., Tandberg D. The effect of physician gender on women's perceived pain and embarrassment during pelvic examination. American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 1999. 17(7):635–637.

25. Cervical Cancer related statistics. National Cancer Information Center. 2009. Retrieved January 17, 2011. from http://www.cancer.go.kr/cms/statics/mortality/index.html.

26. Park S., Chang S., Chung C. Contents analysis on cognitive-affective experiences in Pap smear participants. Journal of the Korean Society of Maternal and Child Health. 2004. 8(1):37–48.

27. Park S.J., Park W.S. Identifying barriers to Papanicolaou smear screening in Korean women: Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2010. 21(2):81–86.

28. Patton K.R., Bartfield J.M., McErlean M. The effect of practitioner characteristics on patient pain and embarrassment during ED internal examinations. American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2003. 21(3):205–207.

29. Waller J., Bartoszek M., Marlow L., Wardle J. Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: A population-based survey. Journal of Medical Screening. 2009. 16(4):199–204.