Validation and application of a tool to assess self-confidence to do improvement.

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Open Quality Pub Date : 2025-03-13 DOI:10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003130
Annette Richardson, Jon Rees
{"title":"Validation and application of a tool to assess self-confidence to do improvement.","authors":"Annette Richardson, Jon Rees","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Increasing improvement capability in the workforce is vital within healthcare. The type of quality improvement training to increase capability varies. One way to measure the impact of improvement training is self-confidence to do improvement.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our objectives were to validate a tool to assess self-confidence to do improvement and to observe the degree of change before and after improvement training. We aimed to assess the degree of impact on self-confidence associated with varying exposure to quality improvement training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used an online 10-item and 4-point scale to assess self-confidence before and after improvement training. Reliability analysis using Cronbach's alpha was performed. The nature of the underlying construct was investigated using exploratory factor analysis and a full set of pre and post measures were used, and to compare individual question changes, a series of paired Wilcoxon tests were performed with Bonferroni post hoc corrections for multiple comparisons. To assess the differing lengths of programmes, individual results from each programme were combined meta-analytically with course duration added as a moderator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>252 completed questionnaires were analysed at baseline and a full set of pre and post measures were available for 128 participants. Cronbach's alpha for the tool was satisfactory at 0.93 (0.92-0.94) and measured a single underlying construct with an eigenvalue of 6.17. A significant increase in confidence to improve from before to after intervention was found (t(127) = 14.36, p<0.001, d=1.27 (95% CI 1.03-1.50)). Post-testing differences were significant (F(6,125) = 2.89, p=0.02) with shorter courses having significantly smaller increases in confidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This manuscript provides a validated self-confidence tool to help assess improvement capability. Our tool offers a way to measure the impact of improvement capability on varying training durations and inform decisions about allocating staff time to this activity.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11906974/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Increasing improvement capability in the workforce is vital within healthcare. The type of quality improvement training to increase capability varies. One way to measure the impact of improvement training is self-confidence to do improvement.

Objectives: Our objectives were to validate a tool to assess self-confidence to do improvement and to observe the degree of change before and after improvement training. We aimed to assess the degree of impact on self-confidence associated with varying exposure to quality improvement training.

Methods: We used an online 10-item and 4-point scale to assess self-confidence before and after improvement training. Reliability analysis using Cronbach's alpha was performed. The nature of the underlying construct was investigated using exploratory factor analysis and a full set of pre and post measures were used, and to compare individual question changes, a series of paired Wilcoxon tests were performed with Bonferroni post hoc corrections for multiple comparisons. To assess the differing lengths of programmes, individual results from each programme were combined meta-analytically with course duration added as a moderator.

Results: 252 completed questionnaires were analysed at baseline and a full set of pre and post measures were available for 128 participants. Cronbach's alpha for the tool was satisfactory at 0.93 (0.92-0.94) and measured a single underlying construct with an eigenvalue of 6.17. A significant increase in confidence to improve from before to after intervention was found (t(127) = 14.36, p<0.001, d=1.27 (95% CI 1.03-1.50)). Post-testing differences were significant (F(6,125) = 2.89, p=0.02) with shorter courses having significantly smaller increases in confidence.

Conclusions: This manuscript provides a validated self-confidence tool to help assess improvement capability. Our tool offers a way to measure the impact of improvement capability on varying training durations and inform decisions about allocating staff time to this activity.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ Open Quality Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
'Monday's feel calmer when creative practitioners are here': a quality improvement project exploring whether creative-practitioner sessions on adult inpatient mental-health wards reduce levels of violence and aggression. Impact of illness and death: comparison of Load and QALY models. Increasing take-home naloxone kit distribution to patients with substance use disorder before hospital discharge: a quality improvement project. Validation and application of a tool to assess self-confidence to do improvement. Economic case for reducing inequities in patient safety.
×
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:481959085
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