Development and validation of a novel clinical  instrument for wound management at a tertiary  hospital in Ghana :

Dorothy Owusu-Boakye; Tom  Akuetteh Ndanu; Edem   Angyigba; Albert  Paintsil; Honghong  Wang

doi:10.46829/hsijournal.2026.4.8.2.1468-1475

Dorothy Owusu-Boakye Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Korle Bu, Accra, Ghana; Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
Tom Akuetteh Ndanu University of Ghana Dental School, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana
Edem Angyigba orle Bu Teaching Hospital, Korle Bu, Accra, Ghana; University of Ghana Medical School, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana, Accra, Ghana
Albert Paintsil Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Korle Bu, Accra, Ghana ; University of Ghana Medical School, College of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana, Accra, Ghana
Honghong Wang Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46829/hsijournal.2026.4.8.2.1468-1475

Keywords: Nurses, questionnaire instrument, wound management, knowledge, practice, reliability, content validity

Abstract

Background: Wound management remains a challenge globally. Patients’ outcomes after wound care have not been satisfactory due to the lack of an appropriate clinical guideline instrument for wound management among nurses in health institutions in Ghana. Some of the desired outcomes include infection prevention, faster wound healing, fewer complications, fewer hospitalisations, and decreased mortality. However,
the currently available instrument in Ghana has not yielded the desired results, highlighting the need for a more appropriate, standardised instrument to improve wound care outcomes.
Objective: This study aimed to develop and evaluate the instrument for managing wounds.
Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 200 consenting nurses of various ranks recruited from four departments at Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital. The instrument used was self-administered. It involved 23 items on a 4-point Likert scale from three domains: before, during and after and two subdomains: assessment and technique. Mean scores were computed for each item. Values greater than or equal to 2 were classified as good knowledge and practice. Cronbach’s α was used to test reliability, and the content validity index (CVI) for validity of the tool.
Results: Cronbach’s α was 0.7, the CVI was 0.87, and the interclass correlation coefficient was 0.801. The mean scores of the domains were: before (3.3 ± 0.4); during (3.2 ± 0.4); after (3.8 ± 0.2), technique of wound care (3.5 ± 0.5); and wound assessment (3.2 ± 0.4). The maximum score was 4. These mean scores were all above 3, indicating positive responses to most items in the instrument.
Conclusion: The instrument had high reliability and a good CVI, with high positive mean scores on the items. The instrument is therefore reliable for use in wound care to improve quality, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction.