INTRODUCTION: Repositioning of patients with reduced or impaired mobility could lessen pressure ulcers (PU). Automated preventive devices can support nurses, but user acceptance must be determined with valid and reliable tools. This study measured user acceptance of an automatic lateral turning device, using a self-developed questionnaire. METHOD: The study included 194 nurses in leadership positions from 75 institutions. A two-page user acceptance questionnaire was designed and tested for internal validity (exploratory factor analysis; EFA) and reliability (Cronbach's-α). A linear regression analysis was used to test the model's theoretical framework. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 74.9%. The EFA revealed five exploratory factors ("pain/well-being", "PU prevention", "handling", "nurse support", and "obese patient support") from the two outcomes ("general satisfaction" and "can replace manual repositioning"). The adjusted r2 was 0.607 for "general satisfaction", with the maximum standardized β for "PU prevention" (0.476), "pain/well-being" (β = 0.197) and "handling" (β = 0.145). The adjusted r2 for "can replace manual positioning" was 0.458. The β for "nurse support" was 0.264, followed by "pain-wellbeing" (β = 0.224) and "obese patient support" (β = 0.218). CONCLUSION: The psychometric testing results were satisfactory. Overall user acceptance of the automatic lateral turning device was high. A positive evaluation of the system's functionality, regarding the prevention of PU, is essential for patient and staff satisfaction, as well as user recommendation.
INTRODUCTION: Repositioning of patients with reduced or impaired mobility could lessen pressure ulcers (PU). Automated preventive devices can support nurses, but user acceptance must be determined with valid and reliable tools. This study measured user acceptance of an automatic lateral turning device, using a self-developed questionnaire. METHOD: The study included 194 nurses in leadership positions from 75 institutions. A two-page user acceptance questionnaire was designed and tested for internal validity (exploratory factor analysis; EFA) and reliability (Cronbach's-α). A linear regression analysis was used to test the model's theoretical framework. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 74.9%. The EFA revealed five exploratory factors ("pain/well-being", "PU prevention", "handling", "nurse support", and "obesepatient support") from the two outcomes ("general satisfaction" and "can replace manual repositioning"). The adjusted r2 was 0.607 for "general satisfaction", with the maximum standardized β for "PU prevention" (0.476), "pain/well-being" (β = 0.197) and "handling" (β = 0.145). The adjusted r2 for "can replace manual positioning" was 0.458. The β for "nurse support" was 0.264, followed by "pain-wellbeing" (β = 0.224) and "obesepatient support" (β = 0.218). CONCLUSION: The psychometric testing results were satisfactory. Overall user acceptance of the automatic lateral turning device was high. A positive evaluation of the system's functionality, regarding the prevention of PU, is essential for patient and staff satisfaction, as well as user recommendation.