Cargando…
Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are integral to patient care, policy decision making and healthcare delivery. PRO assessment in pressure ulcers is in its infancy, with few studies including PROs as study outcomes. Further, there are no pressure ulcer PRO instruments available. METHOD...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3698102/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23764247 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-95 |
_version_ | 1782275241790144512 |
---|---|
author | Gorecki, Claudia Brown, Julia M Cano, Stefan Lamping, Donna L Briggs, Michelle Coleman, Susanne Dealey, Carol McGinnis, Elizabeth Nelson, Andrea E Stubbs, Nikki Wilson, Lyn Nixon, Jane |
author_facet | Gorecki, Claudia Brown, Julia M Cano, Stefan Lamping, Donna L Briggs, Michelle Coleman, Susanne Dealey, Carol McGinnis, Elizabeth Nelson, Andrea E Stubbs, Nikki Wilson, Lyn Nixon, Jane |
author_sort | Gorecki, Claudia |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are integral to patient care, policy decision making and healthcare delivery. PRO assessment in pressure ulcers is in its infancy, with few studies including PROs as study outcomes. Further, there are no pressure ulcer PRO instruments available. METHODS: We used gold-standard methods to develop and evaluate a new PRO instrument for people with pressure ulcers (the PU-QOL instrument). Firstly a conceptual framework was developed forming the basis of PU-QOL scales. Next an exhaustive item pool was used to produce a draft instrument that was pretested using mixed methods (cognitive interviews and Rasch Measurement Theory). Finally, we undertook psychometric evaluation in two parts. This first part was item reduction, using PU-QOL data from 227 patients. The second part was reliability and validity evaluation of the item-reduced version using both Traditional and Rasch methods, on PU-QOL data from 229 patients. RESULTS: The final PU-QOL contains 10 scales for measuring symptoms, physical functioning, psychological well-being and social participation specific to pressure ulcers. It is intended for administration and patients rate the amount of “bother” attributed during the past week on a 3-point response scale. Scale scores are generated by summing items, with lower scores indicating better outcome. The PU-QOL instrument was found to be acceptable, reliable (Cronbach’s alpha values ranging 0.89 - 0.97) and valid (hypothesised correlations between PU-QOL and SF-12 scores (r >0.30) and PU-QOL scales and sociodemographic variables (r <0.30) were consistent with predictions). CONCLUSIONS: The PU-QOL instrument provides a standardised method for assessing PROs, reflecting the domains in a pressure ulcer-specific conceptual framework. It is intended for evaluating patient orientated differences between interventions and in particular the impact from the perspective of patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3698102 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36981022013-07-02 Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument Gorecki, Claudia Brown, Julia M Cano, Stefan Lamping, Donna L Briggs, Michelle Coleman, Susanne Dealey, Carol McGinnis, Elizabeth Nelson, Andrea E Stubbs, Nikki Wilson, Lyn Nixon, Jane Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are integral to patient care, policy decision making and healthcare delivery. PRO assessment in pressure ulcers is in its infancy, with few studies including PROs as study outcomes. Further, there are no pressure ulcer PRO instruments available. METHODS: We used gold-standard methods to develop and evaluate a new PRO instrument for people with pressure ulcers (the PU-QOL instrument). Firstly a conceptual framework was developed forming the basis of PU-QOL scales. Next an exhaustive item pool was used to produce a draft instrument that was pretested using mixed methods (cognitive interviews and Rasch Measurement Theory). Finally, we undertook psychometric evaluation in two parts. This first part was item reduction, using PU-QOL data from 227 patients. The second part was reliability and validity evaluation of the item-reduced version using both Traditional and Rasch methods, on PU-QOL data from 229 patients. RESULTS: The final PU-QOL contains 10 scales for measuring symptoms, physical functioning, psychological well-being and social participation specific to pressure ulcers. It is intended for administration and patients rate the amount of “bother” attributed during the past week on a 3-point response scale. Scale scores are generated by summing items, with lower scores indicating better outcome. The PU-QOL instrument was found to be acceptable, reliable (Cronbach’s alpha values ranging 0.89 - 0.97) and valid (hypothesised correlations between PU-QOL and SF-12 scores (r >0.30) and PU-QOL scales and sociodemographic variables (r <0.30) were consistent with predictions). CONCLUSIONS: The PU-QOL instrument provides a standardised method for assessing PROs, reflecting the domains in a pressure ulcer-specific conceptual framework. It is intended for evaluating patient orientated differences between interventions and in particular the impact from the perspective of patients. BioMed Central 2013-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3698102/ /pubmed/23764247 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-95 Text en Copyright © 2013 Gorecki et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Gorecki, Claudia Brown, Julia M Cano, Stefan Lamping, Donna L Briggs, Michelle Coleman, Susanne Dealey, Carol McGinnis, Elizabeth Nelson, Andrea E Stubbs, Nikki Wilson, Lyn Nixon, Jane Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title | Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title_full | Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title_fullStr | Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title_full_unstemmed | Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title_short | Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument |
title_sort | development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the pu-qol instrument |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3698102/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23764247 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-95 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT goreckiclaudia developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT brownjuliam developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT canostefan developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT lampingdonnal developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT briggsmichelle developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT colemansusanne developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT dealeycarol developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT mcginniselizabeth developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT nelsonandreae developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT stubbsnikki developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT wilsonlyn developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument AT nixonjane developmentandvalidationofanewpatientreportedoutcomemeasureforpatientswithpressureulcersthepuqolinstrument |