Dataset Information

Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to measure cancer patients' perception of care coordination.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Although the importance of care coordination (CC) is well-recognized, cancer patients often receive poorly coordinated care across varied care settings and different oncology providers. Efforts to improve cancer care are hampered by lack of adequate measures. In this two-part, mixed-method study, we describe the development, refinement, and validation of a new care coordination instrument (CCI) designed to assess cancer patients' perception of CC. METHODS:In Study 1, an initial CCI was developed incorporating questions based on literature review. The items were then modified following four field tests conducted in a large academic hospital with oncology nurses (n?=?20) and cancer patients (n?=?120). This modified instrument was used to determine whether the CCI was able to distinguish CC between two practices (30 GI and 30 myeloma patients) within the same hospital setting. In Study 2, 68 patients receiving community-based care participated in seven focus groups. Based on these discussions, the CCI items were again refined, and psychometric evaluation was conducted to assess the quality of the instrument. RESULTS:Based on field tests, 3 domains of the CCI, Communication, Navigation, and Operational, were defined as critical components of CC. The Operational domain evaluates efficiency of care and is unique to this CCI. The field test demonstrated that GI patients reported significantly better CC Overall and for the Communication and Navigation domains (all p?

SUBMITTER: Okado I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6975072 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to measure cancer patients' perception of care coordination.

Okado Izumi I Cassel Kevin K Pagano Ian I Holcombe Randall F RF

BMC health services research 20200121 1

<h4>Background</h4>Although the importance of care coordination (CC) is well-recognized, cancer patients often receive poorly coordinated care across varied care settings and different oncology providers. Efforts to improve cancer care are hampered by lack of adequate measures. In this two-part, mixed-method study, we describe the development, refinement, and validation of a new care coordination instrument (CCI) designed to assess cancer patients' perception of CC.<h4>Methods</h4>In Study 1, an ...[more]

PMID: 31964391

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImproving the coordination of cancer care is a priority area for service improvement. However, quality improvement initiatives are hindered by the lack of accurate and reliable measures of this aspect of cancer care. This study was conducted to develop a questionnaire to measures patients' experience of cancer care coordination and to assess the psychometric properties of this instrument.MethodsQuestionnaire items were developed on the basis of literature review and qualitative research involving focus groups and interviews with cancer patients, carers and clinicians. The draft instrument was completed 686 patients who had been recently treated for a newly diagnosed cancer, including patients from metropolitan, regional and rural areas of New South Wales, Australia. To assess test-retest reliability, 119 patients completed the questionnaire twice. Unreliable items those with limited variability or high levels of missing data were eliminated. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to define the underlying factor structure of the remaining items and subscales were constructed. Correlations between these and global measures of the experience of care coordination and the quality of care were assessed.ResultsOf 40 items included in the draft questionnaire, 20 were eliminated due to poor test-retest reliability (n = 4), limited response distributions (n = 8), failure to load onto a factor (n = 7) or detrimental effect on the internal consistency of the scale (n = 1). The remaining 20 items loaded onto two factors named 'Communication' and 'Navigation', which explained 91% of the common variance. Internal consistency was with high for the instrument (Cronbach's alpha 0.88) and each subscale (Cronbach's alpha 0.87 and 0.73 respectively). There was no apparent 'floor' or 'ceiling' effect for the total score or the Communication subscale, but evidence of a ceiling effect for the Navigation subscale with 21% of respondents achieving the highest possible score. There were moderate positive associations between the total score and global measures of care coordination (r = 0.57) and quality of care (r = 0.53).ConclusionsThe instrument developed in this study demonstrated consistency and robust psychometric properties. It may provide a useful tool to measure patients' experience of cancer care coordination in future surveys and intervention studies.

Project description:BackgroundPsychometrically sound measures of chronic disease self-management tasks are needed to improve identification of patient needs and to tailor self-management programs. This study aimed to develop and conduct a preliminary psychometric analysis of the CanSMART questionnaire among a diverse, multimorbid Canadian population.MethodsThe data were drawn from a cross-sectional online survey to examine self-management needs and support preferences. Participants were 306 Canadian adults with one or more physical and/or emotional chronic conditions. The questionnaire on frequency of self-management tasks was developed with substantial patient partner input. We conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) of the 11 self-management tasks comprising the scale in two randomly selected subsamples, followed by Rasch analysis. Associations between patient characteristics and the self-management task subscales and individual items were explored.ResultsThe factor analyses identified two self-management task subscales that were labelled Coping tasks (6 items) and Physical tasks (3 items), with Cronbach's alpha of 0.70 and 0.67, respectively. Rasch analysis suggested that participants had difficulty discriminating between response options "mostly" and "always". In analyses of independent associations with patient characteristics, both Coping and Physical tasks were associated with reporting more than one chronic disease and employment disability. The Coping tasks subscale was associated with female sex. Two items, on medication use and monitoring biological parameters, did not load on either scale. Both were associated with specific diagnoses.ConclusionsIn this preliminary analysis, two self-management tasks subscales exhibit good psychometric properties. Two items that did not load on either scale may represent additional dimensions of self-management. This work provides the basis for further scale development and use in research and clinical practice.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the psychometric properties and construct validity of a survey of primary care providers' (PCPs') experience of specialty care coordination, which is a counterpart to our existing survey ("CSC-Specialist") that measures specialists' experience of specialty care coordination.Data sourcesWe surveyed PCPs from Veterans Health Administration medical centers and community-based outpatient clinics nationwide (N = 1576) in April 2018.Study designWe developed candidate items through literature review, existing surveys, PCP interviews, and expert opinion. We used exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to develop scales and multivariable linear regression to determine their association with PCPs' overall experience of coordination.Data collectionThe online survey included 23 candidate scale items about specialty care coordination and a single item asking respondents to rate their overall experience of specialty care coordination on a 0-10 scale. All VA PCPs were eligible. We sent survey invitations to PCPs following local Section Chiefs' email introduction (N = 926) and by directly emailing two random samples (N = 400 and N = 6653), overall response rate across the three nonoverlapping samples = 24 percent.Principal findingsAnalyses identified 20 items forming 6 scales with strong psychometric properties and predictive power for overall coordination. Two scales are identical to CSC-Specialist scales: "Communication" (k = 3, α = 0.87) and "Data Transfer" (k = 2, α = 0.92); one is similar: "Relationships and Collaboration" (k = 6, α = 0.90). The three remaining scales address the PCP's unique perspective: "Role Clarity" (k = 3, α = 0.85), "Role Agreement" (k = 3, α = 0.75), and "Making Referrals" (k = 3, α = 0.75). The six scales together explained 67 percent of the variance in PCPs' overall coordination experience with specialists.ConclusionsThe Coordination of Specialty Care-Primary Care Provider Survey (CSC-PCP) is a novel 20-item survey that can be used in quality improvement or health services research, alone or in combination with the CSC-Specialist, to evaluate coordination of care as experienced by either or both participants.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Successfully implementing eMental health (eMH) interventions in routine mental health care constitutes a major challenge. Reliable instruments to assess implementation progress are essential. The Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) study developed a brief self-report questionnaire that could be helpful in measuring implementation progress. Based on the Normalization Process Theory, this instrument focuses on 4 generative mechanisms involved in implementation processes: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to translate the NoMAD questionnaire to Dutch and to confirm the factor structure in Dutch mental health care settings. METHODS:Dutch mental health care professionals involved in eMH implementation were invited to complete the translated NoMAD questionnaire. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to verify interpretability of scale scores for 3 models: (1) the theoretical 4-factor structure, (2) a unidimensional model, and (3) a hierarchical model. Potential improvements were explored, and correlated scale scores with 3 control questions were used to assess convergent validity. RESULTS:A total of 262 professionals from mental health care settings in the Netherlands completed the questionnaire (female: 81.7%; mean age: 45 [SD=11]). The internal consistency of the 20-item questionnaire was acceptable (.62≤alpha≤.85). The theorized 4-factor model fitted the data slightly better in the CFA than the hierarchical model (Comparative Fit Index=0.90, Tucker Lewis Index=0.88, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation=0.10, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual=0.12, χ22=22.5, P≤.05). However, the difference is small and possibly not outweighing the practical relevance of a total score and subscale scores combined in one hierarchical model. One item was identified as weak (λCA.2=0.10). A moderate-to-strong convergent validity with 3 control questions was found for the Collective Participation scale (.47≤r≤.54, P≤.05). CONCLUSIONS:NoMAD's theoretical factor structure was confirmed in Dutch mental health settings to acceptable standards but with room for improvement. The hierarchical model might prove useful in increasing the practical utility of the NoMAD questionnaire by combining a total score with information on the 4 generative mechanisms. Future research should assess the predictive value and responsiveness over time and elucidate the conceptual interpretability of NoMAD in eMH implementation practices.

Project description:BackgroundBack pain is an important public health problem and the leading cause of adult disability worldwide and is rising among schoolchildren populations. Despite numerous studies reporting on back care interventions in pediatric population; there is currently no existing theory-based instrument to assess impact and outcome of these programs. This paper reports on development and psychometric testing of a theory based back-care behavior instrument for use among elementary schoolchildren.MethodsThis was a three-phases study that included the following steps: a) a literature research to review existing instruments that assess healthy spine-related behavior in elementary schoolchildren; b) development of a new instrument namely the Back-care Behavior Assessment Questionnaire (BABAQ) based on the Social Cognitive Theory and existing instruments, and c) conducting a cross sectional study to test psychometric properties of the BABAQ by estimating the content validity ratio (CVR), the content validity index (CVI), performing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability analysis, and convergent validity as estimated by the Average Variance Extracted (AVE).ResultsFirst, a questionnaire (the BABAQ) was developed. It contained of 49 items tapping into 5 pre-defined constructs (skills, knowledge, self-efficacy, expectation beliefs, and behavior). Then, 610 fifth-grade female schoolchildren were entered into a cross sectional study and they completed the BABAQ. The CVR and the CVI of the questionnaire was found to be ≥0.54 and > 0.7, respectively. The CFA confirmed the five constructs and showed good fit for the data. The intraclass correlation (ICC) and the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the BABAQ were 0.84 (P < 0.001) and 0.93, respectively. The convergent validity as measured by the AVE also showed satisfactory results.ConclusionThe findings suggest that the Back-care Behavior Assessment Questionnaire (BABAQ) is a valid instrument for measuring healthy spine-related behaviors among schoolchildren.

Project description:Headache disorders are both common and burdensome but, given the many people affected, provision of health care to all is challenging. Structured headache services based in primary care are the most efficient, equitable and cost-effective solution but place responsibility for managing most patients on health-care providers with limited training in headache care. The development of practical management aids for primary care is therefore a purpose of the Global Campaign against Headache. This manuscript presents an outcome measure, the Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire, describing its purpose, development, psychometric evaluation and assessment for clinical utility. The objective was a simple-to-use instrument that would both assess outcome and provide guidance to improving outcome, having utility across the range of headache disorders, across clinical settings and across countries and cultures.After literature review, an expert consensus group drawn from all six world regions formulated HURT through item development and item reduction using item-response theory. Using the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study's general-population respondent panel, two mailed surveys assessed the psychometric properties of HURT, comparing it with other instruments as external validators. Reliability was assessed in patients in two culturally-contrasting clinical settings: headache specialist centres in Europe (n = 159) and primary-care centres in Saudi Arabia (n = 40). Clinical utility was assessed in similar settings (Europe n = 201; Saudi Arabia n = 342).The final instrument, an 8-item self-administered questionnaire, addressed headache frequency, disability, medication use and effect, patients' perceptions of headache "control" and their understanding of their diagnoses. Psychometric evaluation revealed a two-factor model (headache frequency, disability and medication use; and medication efficacy and headache control), with scale properties apparently stable across disorders and correlating well and in the expected directions with external validators. The literature review found few instruments linking assessment to clinical advice or suggested actions: HURT appeared to fill this gap. In European specialist care, it showed utility as an outcome measure across headache disorders. In Saudi Arabian primary care, HURT (translated into Arabic) was reliable and responsive to clinical change.With demonstrated validity and clinical utility across disorders, cultures and settings, HURT is available for clinical and research purposes.

Dataset Information

Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to measure cancer patients' perception of care coordination.

Publications

Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to measure cancer patients' perception of care coordination.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets