Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Measure to Assess Patients' Threat Perceptions in the Emergency Department.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Threat perceptions in the emergency department (ED; e.g., patients' subjective feelings of helplessness or lack of control) during evaluation for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are associated with the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and PTSD has been associated with medication nonadherence, cardiac event recurrence, and mortality. This study reports the development and validation of a seven-item measure of ED threat perceptions in English- and Spanish-speaking patients evaluated for ACS. METHODS:Participants were drawn from an observational cohort study of 1,000 patients evaluated for ACS between 2013 and 2016 in a large New York City hospital. Participants reported on threat perceptions in the ED and during inpatient stay (using 12 items previously identified as predictive of PTSD) and reported on cardiac-induced PTSD 1 month postdischarge. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to establish the factor structure and test measurement invariance. Validity and reliability were examined, as was the association of ED threat perceptions with cardiac-induced PTSD. RESULTS:Factor analyses identified a seven-item measure of ED threat perceptions (e.g., "I feel helpless," "I am worried that I am going to die") for both English- and Spanish-speaking patients. ED threat perceptions demonstrated convergent validity, correlating with ED stress and ED crowdedness (r = 0.29 and r = 0.14), good internal consistency (? = 0.82), and stability (r = 0.61). Threat perceptions were associated with cardiac-induced acute stress at inpatient and PTSD symptoms at 1 month (r = 0.43 and r = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS:This brief tool assessing ED threat perceptions has clinical utility for providers to identify patients at risk for developing cardiac-induced PTSD and is critical to inform research on whether threat may be modified in-ED to reduce PTSD incidence.

SUBMITTER: Cornelius T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6185758 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and Validation of a Measure to Assess Patients' Threat Perceptions in the Emergency Department.

Cornelius Talea T Agarwal Sachin S Garcia Othanya O Chaplin William W Edmondson Donald D Chang Bernard P BP

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 20181001 10

<h4>Objective</h4>Threat perceptions in the emergency department (ED; e.g., patients' subjective feelings of helplessness or lack of control) during evaluation for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are associated with the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and PTSD has been associated with medication nonadherence, cardiac event recurrence, and mortality. This study reports the development and validation of a seven-item measure of ED threat perceptions in English- and Spanish-spe ...[more]

PMID: 29972892

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate stratification of sepsis can effectively guide the triage of patient care and shared decision making in the emergency department (ED). However, previous research on sepsis identification models focused mainly on ICU patients, and discrepancies in model performance between the development and external validation datasets are rarely evaluated. The aim of our study was to develop and externally validate a machine learning model to stratify sepsis patients in the ED. We retrospectively collected clinical data from two geographically separate institutes that provided a different level of care at different time periods. The Sepsis-3 criteria were used as the reference standard in both datasets for identifying true sepsis cases. An eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm was developed to stratify sepsis patients and the performance of the model was compared with traditional clinical sepsis tools; quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS). There were 8296 patients (1752 (21%) being septic) in the development and 1744 patients (506 (29%) being septic) in the external validation datasets. The mortality of septic patients in the development and validation datasets was 13.5% and 17%, respectively. In the internal validation, XGBoost achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.86, exceeding SIRS (0.68) and qSOFA (0.56). The performance of XGBoost deteriorated in the external validation (the AUROC of XGBoost, SIRS and qSOFA was 0.75, 0.57 and 0.66, respectively). Heterogeneity in patient characteristics, such as sepsis prevalence, severity, age, comorbidity and infection focus, could reduce model performance. Our model showed good discriminative capabilities for the identification of sepsis patients and outperformed the existing sepsis identification tools. Implementation of the ML model in the ED can facilitate timely sepsis identification and treatment. However, dataset discrepancies should be carefully evaluated before implementing the ML approach in clinical practice. This finding reinforces the necessity for future studies to perform external validation to ensure the generalisability of any developed ML approaches.

Project description:Assessment environment, synonymous with climate or atmosphere, is multifaceted. Although there are valid and reliable instruments for measuring the educational environment, there is no validated instrument for measuring the assessment environment in medical programs. This study aimed to develop an instrument for measuring students' perceptions of the assessment environment in an undergraduate medical program and to examine the psychometric properties of the new instrument.The Assessment Environment Questionnaire (AEQ), a 40-item, four-point (1=Strongly Disagree to 4=Strongly Agree) Likert scale instrument designed by the authors, was administered to medical undergraduates from the authors' institution. The response rate was 626/794 (78.84%). To establish construct validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principal component analysis and varimax rotation was conducted. To examine the internal consistency reliability of the instrument, Cronbach's α was computed. Mean scores for the entire AEQ and for each factor/subscale were calculated. Mean AEQ scores of students from different academic years and sex were examined.Six hundred and eleven completed questionnaires were analysed. EFA extracted four factors: feedback mechanism (seven items), learning and performance (five items), information on assessment (five items), and assessment system/procedure (three items), which together explained 56.72% of the variance. Based on the four extracted factors/subscales, the AEQ was reduced to 20 items. Cronbach's α for the 20-item AEQ was 0.89, whereas Cronbach's α for the four factors/subscales ranged from 0.71 to 0.87. Mean score for the AEQ was 2.68/4.00. The factor/subscale of 'feedback mechanism' recorded the lowest mean (2.39/4.00), whereas the factor/subscale of 'assessment system/procedure' scored the highest mean (2.92/4.00). Significant differences were found among the AEQ scores of students from different academic years.The AEQ is a valid and reliable instrument. Initial validation supports its use to measure students' perceptions of the assessment environment in an undergraduate medical program.

Project description:ObjectivesTo develop and evaluate the validity of a scale to assess patients' perceived benefits and risks of reading ambulatory visit notes online (open notes).DesignFour studies were used to evaluate the construct validity of a benefits and risks scale. Study 1 refined the items; study 2 evaluated underlying factor structure and identified the items; study 3 evaluated study 2 results in a separate sample; and study 4 examined factorial invariance of the developed scale across educational subsamples.SettingAmbulatory care in three large health systems in the USA.ParticipantsParticipants in three US health systems who responded to one of two online surveys asking about benefits and risks of reading visit notes: a psychometrics survey of primary care patients, and a large general survey of patients across all ambulatory specialties. Sample sizes: n=439 (study 1); n=439 (study 2); n=500 (study 3); and n=250 (study 4).Primary and secondary outcome measuresQuestionnaire items about patients' perceived benefits and risks of reading online visit notes.ResultsStudy 1 resulted in the selection of a 10-point importance response option format over a 4-point agreement scale. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in study 2 resulted in two-factor solution: a four-item benefits factor with good reliability (alpha=0.83) and a three-item risks factor with poor reliability (alpha=0.52). The factor structure was confirmed in study 3, and confirmatory factor analysis of benefit items resulted in an excellent fitting model, X2(2)=2.949; confirmatory factor index=0.998; root mean square error of approximation=0.04 (0.00, 0.142); loadings 0.68-0.86; alpha=0.88. Study 4 supported configural, measurement and structural invariance for the benefits scale across high and low-education patient groups.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the four-item benefits scale has excellent construct validity and preliminary evidence of generalising across different patient populations. Further scale development is needed to understand perceived risks of reading open notes.

Project description:BackgroundA prediction model of mortality for patients with acute poisoning has to consider both poisoning-related characteristics and patients' physiological conditions; moreover, it must be applicable to patients of all ages. This study aimed to develop a scoring system for predicting in-hospital mortality of patients with acute poisoning at the emergency department (ED).MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of the Injury Surveillance Cohort generated by the Korea Center for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) during 2011-2018. We developed the new-Poisoning Mortality Scoring system (new-PMS) to generate a prediction model using the derivation group (2011-2017 KCDC cohort). Points were computed for categories of each variable. The sum of these points was the new-PMS. The validation group (2018 KCDC cohort) was subjected to external temporal validation. The performance of new-PMS in predicting mortality was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for both the groups.ResultsOf 57,326 poisoning cases, 42,568 were selected. Of these, 34,352 (80.7%) and 8216 (19.3%) were enrolled in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. The new-PMS was the sum of the points for each category of 10 predictors. The possible range of the new-PMS was 0-137 points. Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed adequate calibration for the new-PMS with p values of 0.093 and 0.768 in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. AUROCs of the new-PMS were 0.941 (95% CI 0.934-0.949, p < 0.001) and 0.946 (95% CI 0.929-0.964, p < 0.001) in the derivation and validation groups, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the new-PMS (cutoff value: 49 points) were 86.4%, 87.2%, and 87.2% and 85.9%, 89.5%, and 89.4% in the derivation and validation groups, respectively.ConclusionsWe developed a new-PMS system based on demographic, poisoning-related variables, and vital signs observed among patients at the ED. The new-PMS showed good performance for predicting in-hospital mortality in both the derivation and validation groups. The probability of death increased according to the increase in the new-PMS. The new-PMS accurately predicted the probability of death for patients with acute poisoning. This could contribute to clinical decision making for patients with acute poisoning at the ED.

Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Measure to Assess Patients' Threat Perceptions in the Emergency Department.

Publications

Development and Validation of a Measure to Assess Patients' Threat Perceptions in the Emergency Department.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets