Differentiated TB care matrix: Validating an assessment tool for healthcare workers providing differentiated TB care using Delphi technique

IF 1.7 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.1016/j.cegh.2025.101935
Riswana S. Ansari , Ankeeta Menona Jacob , Avinash K. Shetty , Shazia Anjum
{"title":"Differentiated TB care matrix: Validating an assessment tool for healthcare workers providing differentiated TB care using Delphi technique","authors":"Riswana S. Ansari ,&nbsp;Ankeeta Menona Jacob ,&nbsp;Avinash K. Shetty ,&nbsp;Shazia Anjum","doi":"10.1016/j.cegh.2025.101935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The provision of Differentiated Tuberculosis (TB) Care by healthcare personnel is crucial in optimising patient outcomes and resource utilisation in TB units. This study explores validating a questionnaire on differentiated TB care provision from the healthcare providers' perspective, focusing on facilitating factors and challenges in the healthcare delivery for TB patients using the Delphi Technique.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and materials</h3><div>A multidimensional model was designed to assess differentiated TB care provision by healthcare providers in Karnataka using inductive and deductive methods. Between January 2024 and March 2024, we used the Delphi technique via email and in-person contacts. We engaged a panel of Ten Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to refine and validate the assessment tool containing 146 items iteratively using 2 rounds of 5 SMEs each. For each round, the following metrics were calculated: Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio (CVR), Scale Content Validity Indices (CVI), and Item Impact Score (IIS, Face Validity). The final tool contained only questions with Item Impact Scores of ≥1.5, CVRs of ≥0.99, and CVIs of ≥0.8 (p-value &lt;0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The Item Impact Score (Face Validity) of 126 items accepted as facilitating factors and barriers in providing Differentiated TB care by Community Health Officers and Medical officers for TB patients was ≥1.5. Content Validity Ratios (CVR) for the facilitating factors and barriers in providing differentiated TB care by Community Health Officers and Medical Officers for TB patients was ≥0.99, except for 19 items removed from the final tool. The Scale Content Validity Indices (for relevance), i.e., S-CVI (Average) and S-CVI (Proportional relevance), for 19 items that were removed from the tool failed to reach ≥0.8.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>By determining acceptable content validity ratios and indices using the Delphi technique, this study has developed and validated a tool to assess the facilitating factors and barriers in providing differentiated TB care by the Community Health Officers and Medical Officers for TB patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46404,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 101935"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213398425000247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The provision of Differentiated Tuberculosis (TB) Care by healthcare personnel is crucial in optimising patient outcomes and resource utilisation in TB units. This study explores validating a questionnaire on differentiated TB care provision from the healthcare providers' perspective, focusing on facilitating factors and challenges in the healthcare delivery for TB patients using the Delphi Technique.

Methods and materials

A multidimensional model was designed to assess differentiated TB care provision by healthcare providers in Karnataka using inductive and deductive methods. Between January 2024 and March 2024, we used the Delphi technique via email and in-person contacts. We engaged a panel of Ten Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to refine and validate the assessment tool containing 146 items iteratively using 2 rounds of 5 SMEs each. For each round, the following metrics were calculated: Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio (CVR), Scale Content Validity Indices (CVI), and Item Impact Score (IIS, Face Validity). The final tool contained only questions with Item Impact Scores of ≥1.5, CVRs of ≥0.99, and CVIs of ≥0.8 (p-value <0.05).

Results

The Item Impact Score (Face Validity) of 126 items accepted as facilitating factors and barriers in providing Differentiated TB care by Community Health Officers and Medical officers for TB patients was ≥1.5. Content Validity Ratios (CVR) for the facilitating factors and barriers in providing differentiated TB care by Community Health Officers and Medical Officers for TB patients was ≥0.99, except for 19 items removed from the final tool. The Scale Content Validity Indices (for relevance), i.e., S-CVI (Average) and S-CVI (Proportional relevance), for 19 items that were removed from the tool failed to reach ≥0.8.

Conclusions

By determining acceptable content validity ratios and indices using the Delphi technique, this study has developed and validated a tool to assess the facilitating factors and barriers in providing differentiated TB care by the Community Health Officers and Medical Officers for TB patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
差异化结核病护理矩阵:利用德尔菲技术验证医疗工作者提供差异化结核病护理的评估工具
由卫生保健人员提供差异化结核病(TB)护理对于优化结核病单位的患者结果和资源利用至关重要。本研究从医疗服务提供者的角度对一份关于结核病差异化医疗服务的问卷进行了验证,重点探讨了使用德尔菲技术为结核病患者提供医疗服务的促进因素和挑战。方法和材料设计了一个多维模型,使用归纳和演绎方法评估卡纳塔克邦卫生保健提供者提供的差异化结核病护理。在2024年1月至2024年3月期间,我们通过电子邮件和面对面接触使用了德尔菲技术。我们聘请了一个由十位主题专家组成的小组,以两轮各5家中小企业的方式,反复完善和验证包含146项内容的评估工具。对于每一轮,计算以下指标:Lawshe内容效度比(CVR),量表内容效度指数(CVI)和项目影响评分(IIS,面效度)。最终工具仅包含项目影响评分≥1.5、cvr≥0.99、CVIs≥0.8的问题(p值<;0.05)。结果社区卫生官员和医务官员为结核病患者提供差异化结核病治疗的促进因素和障碍的126个项目的项目影响得分(面效度)≥1.5。社区卫生官员和医疗官员为结核病患者提供差异化结核病治疗的促进因素和障碍的内容效度比(CVR)≥0.99,但从最终工具中删除的19项除外。量表内容效度指数(相关性),即S-CVI(平均)和S-CVI(比例相关性),从工具中删除的19个项目未能达到≥0.8。结论通过采用德尔菲技术确定可接受的内容效度比和指标,本研究开发并验证了一种工具,用于评估社区卫生官员和医疗官员为结核病患者提供差异化结核病治疗的促进因素和障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health
Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
218
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health (CEGH) is a multidisciplinary journal and it is published four times (March, June, September, December) a year. The mandate of CEGH is to promote articles on clinical epidemiology with focus on developing countries in the context of global health. We also accept articles from other countries. It publishes original research work across all disciplines of medicine and allied sciences, related to clinical epidemiology and global health. The journal publishes Original articles, Review articles, Evidence Summaries, Letters to the Editor. All articles published in CEGH are peer-reviewed and published online for immediate access and citation.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and correlates of metabolic syndrome in type 2 diabetes patients: A cross sectional study at the provincial diabetes center in Meknes, Morocco The state of disease research in the Middle East and North Africa from 1980 to 2023 Global research trends on sleep quality among workers: A 20-year bibliometric analysis (2005–2024) Navigating urban ageing: Exploring the impact of social network types on subjective well-being among older Indians Health literacy and coronavirus guideline adherence among families in Mexico
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1