Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Establishing the content validity of a new emergency department patient-reported experience measure (ED PREM): a Delphi study.
Bull, Claudia; Crilly, Julia; Latimer, Sharon; Gillespie, Brigid M.
Afiliação
  • Bull C; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, 4215, Australia. claudia.bull@griffithuni.edu.au.
  • Crilly J; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, 4215, Australia.
  • Latimer S; Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Southport, Queensland, 4215, Australia.
  • Gillespie BM; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, 4215, Australia.
BMC Emerg Med ; 22(1): 65, 2022 04 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35397490
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported experience measures aim to capture the patient's perspective of what happened during a care encounter and how it happened. However, due to a lack of guidance to support patient-reported experience measure development and reporting, the content validity of many instruments is unclear and ambiguous. Thus, the aim of this study was to establish the content validity of a newly developed Emergency Department Patient-Reported Experience Measure (ED PREM). METHODS: ED PREM items were developed based on the findings of a systematic mixed studies review, and qualitative interviews with Emergency Department patients that occurred during September and October, 2020. Individuals who participated in the qualitative interviews were approached again during August 2021 to participate in the ED PREM content validation study. The preliminary ED PREM comprised 37 items. A two-round modified, online Delphi study was undertaken where patient participants were asked to rate the clarity, relevance, and importance of ED PREM items on a 4-point content validity index scale. Each round lasted for two-weeks, with 1 week in between for analysis. Consensus was a priori defined as item-level content validity index scores of ≥0.80. A scale-level content validity index score was also calculated. RESULTS: Fifteen patients participated in both rounds of the online Delphi study. At the completion of the study, two items were dropped and 13 were revised, resulting in a 35-item ED PREM. The scale-level content validity index score for the final 35-item instrument was 0.95. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed ED PREM demonstrates good content validity and aligns strongly with the concept of Emergency Department patient experience as described in the literature. The ED PREM will next be administered in a larger study to establish its' construct validity and reliability. There is an imperative for clear guidance on PREM content validation methodologies. Thus, this study may inform the efforts of other researchers undertaking PREM content validation.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article