Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Prioritisation of patients on waiting lists for hip and knee arthroplasties and cataract surgery: Instruments validation.
Allepuz, Alejandro; Espallargues, Mireia; Moharra, Montse; Comas, Mercè; Pons, Joan M V.
Afiliação
  • Allepuz A; Quality in Health Care Area, Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Research, Carrer de Roc Boronat, 81-95 (segona planta) 08005, Barcelona, Spain. aallepuz@aatrm.catsalut.net
BMC Health Serv Res ; 8: 76, 2008 Apr 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18397519
BACKGROUND: Prioritisation instruments were developed for patients on waiting list for hip and knee arthroplasties (AI) and cataract surgery (CI). The aim of the study was to assess their convergent and discriminant validity and inter-observer reliability. METHODS: Multicentre validation study which included orthopaedic surgeons and ophthalmologists from 10 hospitals. Participating doctors were asked to include all eligible patients placed in the waiting list for the procedures under study during the medical visit. Doctors assessed patients' priority through a visual analogue scale (VAS) and administered the prioritisation instrument. Information on socio-demographic data and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (HUI3, EQ-5D, WOMAC and VF-14) was obtained through a telephone interview with patients. The correlation coefficients between the prioritisation instrument score and VAS and HRQOL were calculated. For the reliability study a self-administered questionnaire, which included hypothetic patients' scenarios, was sent via postal mail to the doctors. The priority of these scenarios was assessed through the prioritisation instrument. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between doctors was calculated. RESULTS: Correlations with VAS were strong for the AI (0.64, CI95%: 0.59-0.68) and for the CI (0.65, CI95%: 0.62-0.69), and moderate between the WOMAC and the AI (0.39, CI95%: 0.33-0.45) and the VF-14 and the CI (0.38, IC95%: 0.33-0.43). The results of the discriminant analysis were in general as expected. Inter-observer reliability was 0.79 (CI95%: 0.64-0.94) for the AI, and 0.79 (CI95%: 0.63-0.95) for the CI. CONCLUSION: The results show acceptable validity and reliability of the prioritisation instruments in establishing priority for surgery.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde / Extração de Catarata / Listas de Espera / Avaliação de Processos em Cuidados de Saúde / Artroplastia de Quadril / Artroplastia do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2008 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde / Extração de Catarata / Listas de Espera / Avaliação de Processos em Cuidados de Saúde / Artroplastia de Quadril / Artroplastia do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2008 Tipo de documento: Article