Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Development and validation of a contextualised measure of resilience in veterinary practice: the Veterinary Resilience Scale–Personal Resources (VRS–PR)
  1. Susan M Matthew1,
  2. Kira J Carbonneau2,
  3. Caroline F Mansfield3,
  4. Sanaa Zaki4,
  5. Martin A Cake5 and
  6. Michelle L McArthur6
  1. 1 Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA
  2. 2 Department of Kinesiology and Educational Psychology, College of Education, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA
  3. 3 School of Education, University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia
  4. 4 Sydney School of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  5. 5 College of Veterinary Medicine, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia
  6. 6 School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, South Australia, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Susan M Matthew, Washington State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Pullman, WA 99164, USA; susan.matthew{at}wsu.edu

Abstract

Background This article reports on the development and validation of a contextualised measure of personal resources for resilience in veterinary practice.

Methods Exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modelling were used to evaluate data from two surveys of veterinary practitioners.

Results Exploratory factor analysis of the first survey (n=300) revealed six items comprising the Veterinary Resilience Scale–Personal Resources (VRS–PR). These items focused on flexibility, adaptability, optimism, building strengths, enjoying challenges, and maintaining motivation and enthusiasm at work. Structural equation modelling using the second survey (n=744) confirmed the factor structure of the VRS–PR and established convergent validity with an established measure of general resilience, the Brief Resilience Scale. Examination of the mean and standard deviation of the combined survey data enabled scores on the VRS–PR to be provisionally classified into ‘low’, ‘moderate’ and ‘high’ (reported by approximately 13%, 72% and 15% of respondents, respectively). Respondents also reported results spanning ‘low’, ‘moderate’ and ‘high’ classifications for the Brief Resilience Scale (approximately 34%, 57% and 9%, respectively).

Conclusion The VRS–PR may be used to evaluate the extent to which respondents draw upon the personal resources captured in the scale and identify areas for improvement.

  • stress
  • veterinary profession
  • clinical practice
  • health
  • surveys
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Twitter @ginglymus

  • Funding This study was part of a larger project (VetSet2Go) supported by a grant from the Australian Government Department of Education and Training (formerly Office for Learning and Teaching) (ID15–4930). Additional funding was provided by a Seed Grant from The University of Adelaide School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences.

  • Disclaimer The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Government Department of Education and Training or The University of Adelaide School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement De-identified participant data that underlie the results reported in this article are available from SMM (ORCID iD 0000-0003-0683-5976) for up to 5 years after article publication for readers who wish to confirm the analyses.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.