Validity and Reliability Study of the Holistic Care Scale in Oncology Patients in Türkiye

Abstract

Purpose: The present study aimed to adapt the Holistic Care Inventory (HCI) to the Turkish society and assess its validity and reliability. Design: A methodological research design was used for this study. Methods: There was conducted with 200 patients hospitalized in the oncology clinic of a city hospital in Türkiye. For the scale, language validity, content validity, construct validity, and reliability tests were evaluated respectively. Findings: The HCI consists of four subscales and 37 items. All path coefficients for the items in the scale were found to be over 0.40, and the conditions required for convergent and discriminant validity were met. The Cronbach's Alpha coefficient was 0.974, with 0.952 for the “physical care” subscale, 0.942 for the “sensitive care” subscale, 0.945 for the “interpretive care” subscale, and 0.947 for the “spiritual care” subscale. A significant, positive, and moderate relationship was found between the HCI and the Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Care Scale. Conclusions: The HCI was concluded to be a valid and reliable measurement instrument for the Turkish society and is recommended to be used in patient populations when needed.

Keywords

holistic care cancer patients scale adaptation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdollahi

S. Z.

Mahmoodabad

S. S. M.

Lotfi

M. H.

Ardakani

S. M. Y.

(2023). Development and validation of a questionnaire based on the protection motivation theory to predict cigarette smoking preventive behavior in Iranian university students. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 12(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_1566_21

Akın

Erdoğan

(2007). The Turkish version of the Newcastle satisfaction with nursing care scale: Used on medical and surgical patients. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16(4), 646–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01583.x

Alpar

(2022). Applied statistics and validity-reliability with examples from sports, health and education sciences (7th ed.). Detay Publishing.

American Holistic Nurses Association . (2009). Holistic nursing: Scope and standards of practice. American Nurses Association.

Aslan

Aktürk

Erci

(2020). Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the nurse spiritual care therapeutics scale. Palliative and Supportive Care, 18(2), 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951520000267

Aydın

Hiçdurmaz

(2019). Holistic nursing competence scale: Turkish translation and psychometric testing. International Nursing Review, 66(3), 425–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12502

Bal

Koroglu Kaba

Ozturk

(2024). Turkish validity and reliability of the clinical reasoning scale for nursing students: A methodological study. Journal of Nursology, 27(2), 129135.doi:10.17049/jnursology.1415548

Daghan

Kalkim

Midilli

T S.

(2019) Psychometric evaluation of the Turkish form of the spiritual care competence scale Journal of Religion and Health, 58(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-018-0594-2

Eskimez

Acaroğlu

(2019). Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Care Assessment Scale. Çukurova Medical Journal, 44(4), 1172–1180. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.496287

10.

Fornell

Larcker

D F

(1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312

11.

Gardner

Wheeler

(1987). Patients perceptions of support. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 2(1), 115131. https://doi.org/10.1177/019394598700900110

12.

Güleç Şatır

Kavlak

(2021). Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the “Paternal Antenatal Attachment Scale”. Journal of Human Sciences, 18(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v18i1.6047

13.

Howard

(1975). Humanization and dehumanization of health care. In Howard

Strauss

(Eds.), Humanizing health care (pp. 57–102). John Wiley & Sons.

14.

İsmailoğlu

E. G.

Özdemir

Erol

Zaybak

(2019). Validity and reliability of the Turkish form of the spiritual care needs scale. Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Nursing Journal e-Journal, 12(4), 255–263.

15.

Karataş

Kelleci

(2021). Development of the psychosocial care competence self-assessment scale: A validity and reliability study. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 12(3), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2021.12499

16.

Kilmen

Bulut

(2025). Shortening psychological scales: Semantic similarity matters. Educational and Psychological Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644251319047

17.

Kinchen

(2015). Development of a quantitative measure of holistic nursing care. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 33(3), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898010114563312

18.

Kozak

(2017). Data analysis. Scientific research: design, writing and publication techniques. Detay Publishing.

19.

Latham

(1988). Holistic care inventory. In Watson

(Ed.), Assessing and measuring caring in nursing and health sciences (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

20.

Mariano

(2019). Holistic integrative therapies in palliative care. In Maltzo

Sherman

(Eds.), Palliative care nursing: Quality care to the end of life (5th ed., pp. 257–286). Springer Publishing Co.

21.

Nightingale

(1860). Notes on nursing: What it is, and what it is not. Harrison.

22.

Polit

D. F.

Beck

C. T.

(2021). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (11th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

23.

Puchalski

C. M.

Sbrana

Ferrell

Jafari

King

Balboni

Miccinesi

Vandenhoeck

Silbermann

Balducci

Yong

Antonuzzo

Falcone

Ripamonti

C. I.

(2019). Interprofessional spiritual care in oncology: A literature review. ESMO Open, 4(1), e000465. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000465

24.

Saldıroğlu

Türk

(2021). Validity and reliability of nursing competence holistic assessment scale. Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing Journal, 8(1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.906944

25.

Semerci

Kudubeş

A. A.

Uğur

Yaşa

(2023). Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the nurse spiritual therapeutic scale for oncology patients and caregivers. Journal of Religion and Health, 62(5), 3563–3578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01878-5

26.

Sezgunsay

Yildirim

Guvenc

İyigün

(2025). Holistic care: Concept analysis. Ordu University Journal of Nursing Studies, 8(1), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.38108/ouhcd.1376570

27.

Sitzman

Watson

(Eds.). (2019). Assessing and measuring caring in nursing and health sciences: Watson’s caring science guide (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.

28.

Thomas

L. H.

McColl

Priest

Bond

Boys

R. J.

(1996). Newcastle satisfaction with nursing scales: An instrument for quality assessments of nursing care. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 5(2), 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.5.2.67

29.

Toptaş Kılıç

Öz

(2020). Validity and reliability study of the Turkish form of the Holistic Well-being Scale in individuals with cancer. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 11(2), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2019.26213

30.

Uzun

(2003). Determination of validity and reliability of Turkish form of Newcastle Satisfaction Scale regarding quality of nursing care. Turkish Nurses Journal, 2(54), 16–24.

31.

Watson

(2007). Watson’s theory of human caring and subjective living experiences: Carative factors/caritas processes as a disciplinary guide to the professional nursing practice. Texto & Contexto - Enfermagem, 16(1), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-07072007000100016

32.

Wild

Grove

Martin

Eremenco

McElroy

Verjee-Lorenz

Erikson

(2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x