开发撒哈拉以南非洲儿童需求评估工具:在赞比亚儿科人群中验证和应用PaedsQ4和NEC工具

W. Mutale, F. Goma, L. Gwyther
{"title":"开发撒哈拉以南非洲儿童需求评估工具:在赞比亚儿科人群中验证和应用PaedsQ4和NEC工具","authors":"W. Mutale, F. Goma, L. Gwyther","doi":"10.4172/2165-7386.1000331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Though significant advances have been achieved in the provision of palliative care in Africa in recent years, there is very little evidence for outcomes of effectiveness of this care. A primary reason for this dearth of evidence is the lack of appropriate and validated outcome tools Methodology: This study assessed and applied 2 research tools to assess palliative care needs in children attending University teaching hospital in Lusaka, Zambia. The study population was parents and guardians of children receiving care at the university teaching hospital. Sample size was calculated as 100. Trained research assistants approached potential participants and explained the research to them. Following informed voluntary consent the two questionnaires were administered by the research assistants. These were the Needs Evaluations questionnaire (NEQ) and the paedsQL4 questionnaires. We used Cronbach’s alpha to determine validity and factor analysis to identify relevant factors. We compared the mean difference across the three groups of patients, general paediatric patients, children with HIV, paediatric and oncology patients using ANOVA. Results: Both tools were found to be reliable for assessing palliative care needs in children (Cronbach’s alpha >0.8). Generally there were very high need gaps across all hospital wards with 15/23 items having need gap of >50%. Overall the largest need caps was in information domain. The HIV ward had least need gap with only 8/23 items having a need gap of >50%. Results from the paedsQL4 showed that there were significant mean differences across the three categories of patients in all domains of functioning with oncology patients performing worst. In physical functioning domain, the items showed that 6/7 items had significant mean differences (p<0.05). Confirmatory factors analysis showed that 2 items were loading highly on the physical functioning factor. These were running and participating in sports (0.896). In the emotional functioning domain, 2 items loaded highly on factor analysis, feeling sad (0.842 and angry (0.666). In the social functioning domain, highest loading were in 2 items, both related to making friends i.e getting along with friends (0.826) and friend wanting to be friend (0.847). In the school domain missing school to go hospital loaded highly on factor analysis (0.842) followed by difficulty paying attention in class (0.716) Conclusion: The study successfully applied two quantitative tools for assessing needs in Children. The results showed that the tools are reliable and applicable in the Zambian context. The findings indicate needs gap for child palliative care services in Zambia. Pain control remained in sub-optimal for especially for children with cancer.","PeriodicalId":91127,"journal":{"name":"Journal of palliative care & medicine","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4172/2165-7386.1000331","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing Tools for Needs Assessment for Children in Sub-Saharan Africa: The validation and Application of the PaedsQ4 and NEC Tools in the Zambian Paediatric Population\",\"authors\":\"W. Mutale, F. Goma, L. Gwyther\",\"doi\":\"10.4172/2165-7386.1000331\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Though significant advances have been achieved in the provision of palliative care in Africa in recent years, there is very little evidence for outcomes of effectiveness of this care. A primary reason for this dearth of evidence is the lack of appropriate and validated outcome tools Methodology: This study assessed and applied 2 research tools to assess palliative care needs in children attending University teaching hospital in Lusaka, Zambia. The study population was parents and guardians of children receiving care at the university teaching hospital. Sample size was calculated as 100. Trained research assistants approached potential participants and explained the research to them. Following informed voluntary consent the two questionnaires were administered by the research assistants. These were the Needs Evaluations questionnaire (NEQ) and the paedsQL4 questionnaires. We used Cronbach’s alpha to determine validity and factor analysis to identify relevant factors. We compared the mean difference across the three groups of patients, general paediatric patients, children with HIV, paediatric and oncology patients using ANOVA. Results: Both tools were found to be reliable for assessing palliative care needs in children (Cronbach’s alpha >0.8). Generally there were very high need gaps across all hospital wards with 15/23 items having need gap of >50%. Overall the largest need caps was in information domain. The HIV ward had least need gap with only 8/23 items having a need gap of >50%. Results from the paedsQL4 showed that there were significant mean differences across the three categories of patients in all domains of functioning with oncology patients performing worst. In physical functioning domain, the items showed that 6/7 items had significant mean differences (p<0.05). Confirmatory factors analysis showed that 2 items were loading highly on the physical functioning factor. These were running and participating in sports (0.896). In the emotional functioning domain, 2 items loaded highly on factor analysis, feeling sad (0.842 and angry (0.666). In the social functioning domain, highest loading were in 2 items, both related to making friends i.e getting along with friends (0.826) and friend wanting to be friend (0.847). In the school domain missing school to go hospital loaded highly on factor analysis (0.842) followed by difficulty paying attention in class (0.716) Conclusion: The study successfully applied two quantitative tools for assessing needs in Children. The results showed that the tools are reliable and applicable in the Zambian context. The findings indicate needs gap for child palliative care services in Zambia. Pain control remained in sub-optimal for especially for children with cancer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91127,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of palliative care & medicine\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4172/2165-7386.1000331\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of palliative care & medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4172/2165-7386.1000331\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of palliative care & medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2165-7386.1000331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

导言:尽管近年来非洲在提供姑息治疗方面取得了重大进展,但很少有证据表明这种治疗的效果。缺乏证据的主要原因是缺乏适当和有效的结果工具。方法:本研究评估并应用了2种研究工具来评估在赞比亚卢萨卡大学教学医院就诊的儿童的姑息治疗需求。研究对象是在大学教学医院接受治疗的儿童的父母和监护人。样本量按100计算。训练有素的研究助理接近潜在的参与者,并向他们解释这项研究。根据知情自愿同意,两份问卷由研究助理管理。这些是需求评估问卷(NEQ)和paedsQL4问卷。我们使用Cronbach 's alpha来确定效度,并使用因子分析来确定相关因素。我们使用方差分析比较了三组患者,普通儿科患者,艾滋病毒患儿,儿科和肿瘤患者的平均差异。结果:两种工具均可可靠地评估儿童的姑息治疗需求(Cronbach 's alpha >0.8)。一般来说,所有医院病房的需求缺口非常大,有15/23个项目的需求缺口为50%。总体而言,最大的需求上限是在信息领域。艾滋病病房的需求缺口最小,只有8/23个项目的需求缺口为50%。来自paedsQL4的结果显示,在所有功能领域中,三种类型的患者存在显著的平均差异,其中肿瘤患者表现最差。在身体功能领域,6/7项有显著的平均差异(p<0.05)。验证性因子分析显示,2个项目对身体功能因子的负荷较高。跑步和参加体育运动(0.896)。在情绪功能领域,有2项因子分析得分较高,分别为悲伤(0.842)和愤怒(0.666)。在社交功能领域中,与交朋友相关的2个项目的负荷最高,即与朋友相处(0.826)和朋友想成为朋友(0.847)。在学校领域,因缺课而去医院的因子分析负荷较高(0.842),其次是课堂注意力难以集中(0.716)。结论:本研究成功地应用了两种定量工具来评估儿童的需求。结果表明,该工具是可靠的,适用于赞比亚的情况。调查结果表明,赞比亚儿童姑息治疗服务的需求差距。疼痛控制仍然处于次优状态特别是对于患有癌症的儿童。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Developing Tools for Needs Assessment for Children in Sub-Saharan Africa: The validation and Application of the PaedsQ4 and NEC Tools in the Zambian Paediatric Population
Introduction: Though significant advances have been achieved in the provision of palliative care in Africa in recent years, there is very little evidence for outcomes of effectiveness of this care. A primary reason for this dearth of evidence is the lack of appropriate and validated outcome tools Methodology: This study assessed and applied 2 research tools to assess palliative care needs in children attending University teaching hospital in Lusaka, Zambia. The study population was parents and guardians of children receiving care at the university teaching hospital. Sample size was calculated as 100. Trained research assistants approached potential participants and explained the research to them. Following informed voluntary consent the two questionnaires were administered by the research assistants. These were the Needs Evaluations questionnaire (NEQ) and the paedsQL4 questionnaires. We used Cronbach’s alpha to determine validity and factor analysis to identify relevant factors. We compared the mean difference across the three groups of patients, general paediatric patients, children with HIV, paediatric and oncology patients using ANOVA. Results: Both tools were found to be reliable for assessing palliative care needs in children (Cronbach’s alpha >0.8). Generally there were very high need gaps across all hospital wards with 15/23 items having need gap of >50%. Overall the largest need caps was in information domain. The HIV ward had least need gap with only 8/23 items having a need gap of >50%. Results from the paedsQL4 showed that there were significant mean differences across the three categories of patients in all domains of functioning with oncology patients performing worst. In physical functioning domain, the items showed that 6/7 items had significant mean differences (p<0.05). Confirmatory factors analysis showed that 2 items were loading highly on the physical functioning factor. These were running and participating in sports (0.896). In the emotional functioning domain, 2 items loaded highly on factor analysis, feeling sad (0.842 and angry (0.666). In the social functioning domain, highest loading were in 2 items, both related to making friends i.e getting along with friends (0.826) and friend wanting to be friend (0.847). In the school domain missing school to go hospital loaded highly on factor analysis (0.842) followed by difficulty paying attention in class (0.716) Conclusion: The study successfully applied two quantitative tools for assessing needs in Children. The results showed that the tools are reliable and applicable in the Zambian context. The findings indicate needs gap for child palliative care services in Zambia. Pain control remained in sub-optimal for especially for children with cancer.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is type 2 Diabetes a Hereditary Condition? Causes, Genes, and Preventative Measures. Evaluation of Factors Influencing Breastfeeding in Children Aged 0 to 24 Months Received in an Urban Community Health Center in Abidjan Cocody (Cote d'Ivoire) Effect of Matrix Rhythm Therapy in B/L Adductor Muscle Tightness in Pediatric Cerebral Palsy: A Case Report The Application of Combined Quality of Control Circle for Acute Spinal Cord Injury Silver Linings: The Experience of Hope in Dyads with Motor Neuron Disease. An Explorative Study
×
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