{"title":"丹麦背景下的护理过渡:CTM-15 和 PACT-M 的翻译、跨文化改编和内容验证。","authors":"Merete Ajstrup, Caroline Trillingsgaard Mejdahl, David Høyrup Christiansen, Lene Kongsgaard Nielsen","doi":"10.1186/s41687-024-00739-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transition of care from hospitalisation to home is a complex process with potential patient safety risks, especially for patients with multimorbidity. Traditionally, the quality of transition of care has been evaluated primarily through readmission rates. However, interpreting the readmission rates presents challenges, and readmission rates fail to capture the patient's perspective on the quality of the care transition. Insight into the patient's experience with their care or a health service can be provided through the use of patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and the two PREMs Care Transitions Measure 15 (CTM-15) and Partners at Care Transitions Measure part 1 and 2 (PACT-M1 and PACT-M2) assess on the quality of transition of care from the patients' perspective. The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt, and assess content validity of CTM-15, PACT-M1, and PACT-M2 for Danish-speaking patients with multimorbidity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-step approach was used for content validation, involving cognitive debriefing and interviews with patients, representing the target group, as well as quantitative data collection from healthcare professionals representing all three sectors of the Danish healthcare system. The patients were systematically interviewed regarding the aspects of content validity; comprehensibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness. The healthcare professionals assessed the relevance and comprehensiveness of each item through questionnaires, allowing the calculation of a content validity index (CVI). An item CVI ≥ 0.78 is considered good.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the qualitative data indicated that both CTM-15 and the PACT-M questionnaires were considered relevant, and comprehensible, and comprehensive to the target group. The CVI computed at item level determined that PACT-M1 and PACT-M2 demonstrated excellent content validity among the healthcare professionals, whereas the CVI for two items of the CTM-15 fell below the threshold value for \"good\".</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Danish versions of the PACT-M questionnaires demonstrated good content validity, and the CTM-15 demonstrated acceptable content validity based on qualitative data from patients and quantitative data from healthcare professionals. Further validation of the questionnaires, by assessing their construct validity and reliability is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164838/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transition of care in a Danish context: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation of CTM-15 and PACT-M.\",\"authors\":\"Merete Ajstrup, Caroline Trillingsgaard Mejdahl, David Høyrup Christiansen, Lene Kongsgaard Nielsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41687-024-00739-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transition of care from hospitalisation to home is a complex process with potential patient safety risks, especially for patients with multimorbidity. Traditionally, the quality of transition of care has been evaluated primarily through readmission rates. However, interpreting the readmission rates presents challenges, and readmission rates fail to capture the patient's perspective on the quality of the care transition. Insight into the patient's experience with their care or a health service can be provided through the use of patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and the two PREMs Care Transitions Measure 15 (CTM-15) and Partners at Care Transitions Measure part 1 and 2 (PACT-M1 and PACT-M2) assess on the quality of transition of care from the patients' perspective. The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt, and assess content validity of CTM-15, PACT-M1, and PACT-M2 for Danish-speaking patients with multimorbidity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-step approach was used for content validation, involving cognitive debriefing and interviews with patients, representing the target group, as well as quantitative data collection from healthcare professionals representing all three sectors of the Danish healthcare system. The patients were systematically interviewed regarding the aspects of content validity; comprehensibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness. The healthcare professionals assessed the relevance and comprehensiveness of each item through questionnaires, allowing the calculation of a content validity index (CVI). An item CVI ≥ 0.78 is considered good.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the qualitative data indicated that both CTM-15 and the PACT-M questionnaires were considered relevant, and comprehensible, and comprehensive to the target group. The CVI computed at item level determined that PACT-M1 and PACT-M2 demonstrated excellent content validity among the healthcare professionals, whereas the CVI for two items of the CTM-15 fell below the threshold value for \\\"good\\\".</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Danish versions of the PACT-M questionnaires demonstrated good content validity, and the CTM-15 demonstrated acceptable content validity based on qualitative data from patients and quantitative data from healthcare professionals. Further validation of the questionnaires, by assessing their construct validity and reliability is recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164838/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00739-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00739-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:从住院治疗到居家护理的过渡是一个复杂的过程,存在潜在的患者安全风险,尤其是对于多病患者。传统上,护理过渡的质量主要通过再入院率进行评估。然而,对再入院率的解释是个难题,而且再入院率无法反映患者对护理过渡质量的看法。通过使用患者报告体验测量(PREMs)可以深入了解患者对其护理或医疗服务的体验,而 Care Transitions Measure 15(CTM-15)和 Partners at Care Transitions Measure part 1 and 2(PACT-M1 和 PACT-M2)这两项 PREMs 可以从患者的角度评估护理过渡的质量。本研究的目的是翻译 CTM-15、PACT-M1 和 PACT-M2,并对其进行文化适应性调整和内容有效性评估,以适用于丹麦语多病症患者:方法:采用两步法进行内容验证,包括对代表目标群体的患者进行认知汇报和访谈,以及从代表丹麦医疗保健系统所有三个部门的医疗保健专业人员处收集定量数据。就内容有效性的各个方面,即可理解性、相关性和全面性,对患者进行了系统性访谈。医疗保健专业人员通过问卷对每个项目的相关性和全面性进行评估,从而计算出内容有效性指数(CVI)。项目 CVI ≥ 0.78 即为良好:定性数据的结果表明,CTM-15 和 PACT-M 问卷都被认为与目标群体相关、可理解且全面。根据项目级别计算的 CVI 值确定,PACT-M1 和 PACT-M2 在医护专业人员中表现出极佳的内容效度,而 CTM-15 中两个项目的 CVI 值低于 "良好 "的临界值:结论:丹麦版的 PACT-M 问卷显示出良好的内容效度,而 CTM-15 则根据患者的定性数据和医护人员的定量数据显示出可接受的内容效度。建议通过评估问卷的结构效度和可靠性来进一步验证问卷。
Transition of care in a Danish context: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation of CTM-15 and PACT-M.
Background: Transition of care from hospitalisation to home is a complex process with potential patient safety risks, especially for patients with multimorbidity. Traditionally, the quality of transition of care has been evaluated primarily through readmission rates. However, interpreting the readmission rates presents challenges, and readmission rates fail to capture the patient's perspective on the quality of the care transition. Insight into the patient's experience with their care or a health service can be provided through the use of patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and the two PREMs Care Transitions Measure 15 (CTM-15) and Partners at Care Transitions Measure part 1 and 2 (PACT-M1 and PACT-M2) assess on the quality of transition of care from the patients' perspective. The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt, and assess content validity of CTM-15, PACT-M1, and PACT-M2 for Danish-speaking patients with multimorbidity.
Methods: A two-step approach was used for content validation, involving cognitive debriefing and interviews with patients, representing the target group, as well as quantitative data collection from healthcare professionals representing all three sectors of the Danish healthcare system. The patients were systematically interviewed regarding the aspects of content validity; comprehensibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness. The healthcare professionals assessed the relevance and comprehensiveness of each item through questionnaires, allowing the calculation of a content validity index (CVI). An item CVI ≥ 0.78 is considered good.
Results: The results of the qualitative data indicated that both CTM-15 and the PACT-M questionnaires were considered relevant, and comprehensible, and comprehensive to the target group. The CVI computed at item level determined that PACT-M1 and PACT-M2 demonstrated excellent content validity among the healthcare professionals, whereas the CVI for two items of the CTM-15 fell below the threshold value for "good".
Conclusion: The Danish versions of the PACT-M questionnaires demonstrated good content validity, and the CTM-15 demonstrated acceptable content validity based on qualitative data from patients and quantitative data from healthcare professionals. Further validation of the questionnaires, by assessing their construct validity and reliability is recommended.