Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Tool to Measure Patient Assessment of Clinical Compassion.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Clinician compassion is a vital element of health care quality. Currently, there appears to be no validated and feasible method for health care organizations to measure patient assessment of clinician compassion on a large scale.

Objective

To develop and validate a tool for measuring patient assessment of clinician compassion that can be used in conjunction with the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey.

Design, setting, and participants

This prospective cohort study took place from June 1 to August 30, 2018, at a US academic health care system among a pilot cohort consisting of 3325 adult patients and a validation cohort consisting of 3483 adult patients, both of whom had an outpatient clinic visit and completed the CG-CAHPS survey.

Main outcomes and measurements

After a comprehensive literature review, 12 candidate survey items were developed. Face and construct validity were performed. Candidate items were disseminated to patients in conjunction with the CG-CAHPS survey in a series of 2 studies: (1) exploratory factor analysis in one cohort to determine the factor structure and the most parsimonious set of items; and (2) validity testing in a second cohort using confirmatory factor analysis. Reliability was tested using Cronbach α. Convergent validity was tested with patient assessment of clinician communication and overall satisfaction questions from CG-CAHPS survey.

Results

Overall, 6493 patient responses were analyzed. The mean (SD) age was 60 (15) years, 4239 patients (65.3%) were women, and 5079 (78.2%) were white. Exploratory factor analyses identified a 5-item compassion measure to be the most parsimonious. Confirmatory factor analyses found good fit. The compassion measure demonstrated good internal consistency (α = 0.94) and convergent validity (clinician communication: ρ = 0.44; overall satisfaction: ρ = 0.52) but reflected a patient experience domain (compassionate care) distinct from what is currently captured in the CG-CAHPS survey.

Conclusions and relevance

A simple 5-item tool to measure patient assessment of clinician compassion was developed and validated for use in conjunction with CG-CAHPS survey.

SUBMITTER: Roberts BW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6537812 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and Validation of a Tool to Measure Patient Assessment of Clinical Compassion.

Roberts Brian W BW Roberts Michael B MB Yao Jady J Bosire Joshua J Mazzarelli Anthony A Trzeciak Stephen S

JAMA network open 20190503 5

<h4>Importance</h4>Clinician compassion is a vital element of health care quality. Currently, there appears to be no validated and feasible method for health care organizations to measure patient assessment of clinician compassion on a large scale.<h4>Objective</h4>To develop and validate a tool for measuring patient assessment of clinician compassion that can be used in conjunction with the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey.<h4>Design, ...[more]

PMID: 31099870

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesCompassion is a key indicator of quality care that is reportedly eroding from patients' care experience. While the need to assess compassion is recognised, valid and reliable measures are lacking. This study developed and validated a clinically informed, psychometrically rigorous, patient-reported compassion measure.DesignData were collected from participants living with life-limiting illnesses over two study phases across four care settings (acute care, hospice, long term care (LTC) and homecare). In phase 1, data were analysed through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), with the final items analysed via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in phase 2. The Schwartz Center Compassionate Care Scale (SCCCS), the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r) and Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire (PPEQ) were also administered in phase 2 to assess convergent and divergent validity.Setting and participants633 participants were recruited over two study phases. In the EFA phase, a 54-item version of the measure was administered to 303 participants, with 330 participants being administered the final 15-item measure in the CFA phase.ResultsBoth EFA and CFA confirmed compassion as a single factor construct with factor loadings for the 15-item measure ranging from 0.76 to 0.86, with excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient range: 0.74-0.89) and excellent internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha of 0.96). The measure was positively correlated with the SCCCS (r=0.75, p<0.001) and PPEQ (r=0.60, p<0.001). Participants reporting higher experiences of compassion had significantly greater well-being and lower depression on the ESAS-r. Patients in acute care and hospice reported significantly greater experiences of compassion than LTC residents.ConclusionsThere is strong initial psychometric evidence for the Sinclair Compassion Questionnaire (SCQ) as a valid and reliable patient-reported compassion measure. The SCQ provides healthcare providers, settings and administrators the means to routinely measure patients experiences of compassion, while providing researchers a robust measure to conduct high-quality research.

Project description:BackgroundFarming is a stressful occupation, and a growing body of research shows that farm stressors are associated with poor mental health. To date, there are few methodologically sound surveys that assess farm stressors, and none have been validated for the Canadian context. Our study aimed to: (a) investigate the types of stressors experienced by farmers, (b) develop a farm stress assessment tool and test its factor structure and internal consistency, and (c) assess its criterion-related validity to self-reported levels of anxiety, depression, burnout, and resilience among farmers.MethodsWe developed a 20-item survey based on a review of the literature, examining existing farm stress surveys, and consulting 10 farmers and agricultural industry experts. Then, a convenience sample of farmers living in Alberta, Canada (Sample 1, N = 354) completed a questionnaire containing the 20-item farm stress survey and four validated measures that assessed depression, anxiety, burnout, and resilience. Sample 1 was used to assess the factor structure using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), internal consistency, and criterion-validity of the survey. Next, a convenience sample of farmers living outside of Alberta (Sample 2, N = 138) was used to evaluate the factor structure of the survey using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).ResultsThe results of the EFA revealed five underlying dimensions of farm stressors: Unexpected work disruptions, Agricultural hazards, Farm and financial planning, Isolation, and Regulations and public pressure. The subscales accounted for 61.6% of the variance, and the internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) ranged from 0.66 to.75. Subscale correlations were below 0.44, indicating evidence of discriminant validity. Correlations between the five subscales and the four mental health outcome variables supported the criterion-related validity of the survey. The results of the CFA indicated that the data fit the model, and fit was further improved by correlating one pair of error terms.ConclusionsPreliminary analysis of our Farmer Stress Assessment Tool (FSAT) suggests it is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring a range of stressors farmers face. Implications for policy and community-based mental health interventions that help farmers manage the enduring stressors of agriculture is discussed.

Project description:BackgroundTelehealth is gaining importance in improving healthcare access and outcomes, particularly in underserved regions. Despite its potential, healthcare providers in developing countries struggle to effectively utilize telehealth tools, highlighting the need for structured training. This study aims to develop and validate a specialized tool to assess the telehealth educational environment, addressing the unique challenges of integrating clinical, technological, and interpersonal skills in telehealth education.Objectives(1) To develop a tool for measuring the telehealth educational environment, addressing the unique aspects of telehealth education. (2) To evaluate the validity and reliability of the tool.MethodThis mixed-methods exploratory study had two phases. In Phase 1, the THEEM tool was developed through a literature review and expert feedback. In Phase 2, the tool was validated using content validity, response process validity via cognitive interviews, and construct validity through Exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Participants included telehealth physicians, selected via purposive sampling. Data analysis involved calculating the content validity index for items (CVI-I) and the scale (CVI-S), with values ≥ 0.7. For factor analysis, eigenvalues > 1 and factor loadings ≥ 0.50 were retained. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was considered acceptable at ≥ 0.7.ResultsThe Preliminary THEEM tool consisted of 35 items. Following content validity through expert validation, the number of items was reduced to 32 based on I-CVI values. S-CVI was 0.86. Exploratory factor analysis yielded three factors with a further reduction in the item number to 30. Internal consistency of the final tool with 30 items was calculated as 0·9, suggesting excellent internal consistency of the tool.ConclusionThe THEEM tool provides a valuable, reliable, and valid instrument for assessing the telehealth educational environment. Its development fills a significant gap in existing measurement tools, specifically addressing the needs of telehealth education.

Project description:BackgroundCompleting Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) questionnaires is time consuming. This study aimed to develop and validate an easy-to-use modified PG-SGA (mPG-SGA) for cancer patients.MethodsSeventy professionals assessed the content validity, comprehensibility, and difficulty of the full PG-SGA. A survey including the PG-SGA and other questionnaires was completed by 34 071 adult hospitalized cancer patients with first cancer diagnosis or recurrent disease with any tumour comorbidities from the INSCOC study. Among them, 1558 patients were followed for 5 years after admission. Reliability and rank correlation were estimated to assess the consistency between PG-SGA items and to select mPG-SGA items. The external and internal validity, test-retest reliability, and predictive validity were tested for the mPG-SGA via comparison with both the PG-SGA and abridged PG-SGA (abPG-SGA).ResultsAfter deleting items that more than 50% of professionals considered difficult to evaluate (Worksheet 4) and items with an item-total correlation <0.1, the mPG-SGA was constructed. Nutritional status was categorized using mPG-SGA scores as well-nourished (0 points) or mildly (1-2 points), moderately (3-6 points), or severely malnourished (≥7 points) based on the area under curve (0.962, 0.989, and 0.985) and maximal sensitivity (0.924, 0.918, and 0.945) and specificity (1.000, 1.000, and 0.938) of the cut-off scores. The external and internal validity and test-retest reliability were good. Significant median overall survival differences were found among nutritional status groups categorized by the mPG-SGA: 24, 18, 14, and 10 months for well-nourished, mildly malnourished, moderately malnourished, and severely malnourished, respectively (all Ps < 0.05). Neither the PG-SGA nor the abridged PG-SGA could discriminate the median overall survival differences between the well-nourished and mildly malnourished groups.ConclusionsWe systematically developed and validated the mPG-SGA as an easier-to-use nutritional assessment tool for cancer patients. The mPG-SGA appears to have better predictive validity for survival than the PG-SGA and abridged PG-SGA.

Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Tool to Measure Patient Assessment of Clinical Compassion.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Main outcomes and measurements

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Development and Validation of a Tool to Measure Patient Assessment of Clinical Compassion.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets