Introduction Workplace violence (WPV) incidences are prevalent in healthcare, and existing WPV interventions have only moderate evidence for effectiveness. This study aimed to develop and validate an instrument to assess worksite-specific WPV risk factors in healthcare settings based on a tripartite perspective of key stakeholders to facilitate improved interventions. Methods Three questionnaires were developed to get the responses from healthcare administrators, workers, and clients, representing the three components of Questionnaires to Assess Workplace Violence Risk Factors (QAWRF). The domains of the questionnaires were developed based on The Chappell and Di Martino’s Interactive Model of Workplace Violence, and the items were generated from 28 studies identified from a systematic review of the literature. Six experts, 36 raters, and 90 respondents were recruited to assess the content validity, face validity, and usability and reliability of the QAWRF respectively. Item and Scale Level Content Validity Index, Item and Scale Level Face Validity Index, and Cronbach’s alpha values were determined for QAWRF-administrator, QAWRF-worker, and QAWRF-client. Results The psychometric indices for QAWRF are satisfactory. Conclusion QAWRF holds good content validity, face validity, and reliability, and findings from QAWRF can contribute towards worksite-specific interventions that are expected to be resource efficient and more effective than general WPV interventions.

Background: Venepuncture is one of the commonest stressful invasive procedures in the health care setting. Unfortunately, to date, there was a lack of locally published studies that studied anxiety, especially before the procedure among adult patients. Hence, this study was conducted to determine the factors associated with the state and trait-anxiety among adult patients before the venepuncture procedure in UiTMMC. Methods: A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted among patients while waiting for a venepuncture procedure in March 2020. Patients aged 18 years old and above, Malaysian, able to understand English or Malay and had experienced venepuncture in UiTMMC were recruited. Malay validated version of the State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI) Questionnaire was used to assess the anxiety level. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Version 26.0, and multiple linear regression was used to determine the associated factors for state and trait-anxiety before the venepuncture procedure. Results: A total of 330 patients with a mean age of 46.34 ± 14.34 years participated in this study. The mean of the state-anxiety score was 38.02 ± 14.25 and the mean trait-anxiety score was 36.46 ± 11.47. The correlation between state-anxiety and trait-anxiety scores was highly significant (r=0.870, p<0.001). Factors associated with state-anxiety and trait-anxiety contributed with 72.6% and 58.5% variances, respectively. Conclusions: Adult patients who waiting for venepuncture in were average low state and trait anxiety scores. Although the associated factors were majority non-modifiable, this finding still can instil awareness to the health care workers who are dealing with needle procedurals.

Introduction: Venepuncture procedure is painful and anxiety associated with venepuncture is common. There are many tools for assessing anxiety levels in an outpatient setting. Hence, this study is to compare the degree of agreement between State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) for measuring anxiety levels among adult patients before venepuncture procedure. Methods: A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted among patients while waiting for a venepuncture procedure in the Phlebotomy Unit, UiTMMC in April 2020. The Malay-validated version of the State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI) and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) were used to assess the anxiety level. Differences between sets of data were plotted as described by Bland-Altman to determine the agreement between these two assessment tools. Results: A total of 330 patients participated in the study with a mean age of 46.34 ± 14.34 years old and gender was equally distributed. The scores of state-anxiety (STAI-S), trait-anxiety (STAI-T) and BAI score were 30.04 ± 20.74; 29.51 ± 19.11; and 40.98 ± 20.45, respectively. The score of anxiety using BAI was higher compared to STAI-S (p<0.001) and STAI-T (p<0.001). The mean difference between the STAI-S and BAI was -10.94 (95%CI: -53.01, 26.87) and between the STAI-T and BAI was -11.47 (95%CI: -42.26, 19.32). However, very few patients’ scores outside the 95% LOA for both differences. Conclusion: The STAI and BAI are concordances in measuring anxiety levels among these patients. However, the anxiety score using BAI was higher than STAI. Thus, both assessment tools can be used in clinical practice in measuring anxiety in the out-patients setting.