Cargando…

Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment

Macmillan Cancer Support UK have developed an electronic Holistic Needs Assessment (eHNA) to: (1) help people living with cancer express all their needs, (2) help those helping them better target support. eHNA consists of 48 items each ranked from zero (no problem) to 10. There has been no psychomet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Snowden, Austyn, Fleming, Mick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26543758
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1401-0
_version_ 1782398368130007040
author Snowden, Austyn
Fleming, Mick
author_facet Snowden, Austyn
Fleming, Mick
author_sort Snowden, Austyn
collection PubMed
description Macmillan Cancer Support UK have developed an electronic Holistic Needs Assessment (eHNA) to: (1) help people living with cancer express all their needs, (2) help those helping them better target support. eHNA consists of 48 items each ranked from zero (no problem) to 10. There has been no psychometric analysis of this tool and so its validity and reliability are untested. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the eHNA by examining its construct validity. Objectives were to (a) test whether the eHNA measured holistic concerns and (b) analyse the factor structure of the eHNA. Objectives were achieved through a secondary analysis of 5421 responses to eHNA using concurrent application of Rasch analysis and principal component analysis. All the items bar one fit with the Rasch rating model and were equivalently important to people. Differential item functioning was evident according to whether people were described as curative or not. A 12-factor solution explained 46 % variance. Of this the emotional/spiritual factor explained the most variance accounting for 15 %. The eHNA was internally consistent and conceptually coherent with the construct of holistic needs assessment. Clinical focus is best directed to the individual items highlighted by the patient except where patients check too many problems for the clinician to accurately prioritise. In these cases only, the emotional/spiritual factor may help identify appropriate clinical action. Strengths and weaknesses of the analyses are discussed, particularly in relation to ‘at risk’ subsamples such as those classified as non-curative.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4628027
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46280272015-11-05 Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment Snowden, Austyn Fleming, Mick Springerplus Research Macmillan Cancer Support UK have developed an electronic Holistic Needs Assessment (eHNA) to: (1) help people living with cancer express all their needs, (2) help those helping them better target support. eHNA consists of 48 items each ranked from zero (no problem) to 10. There has been no psychometric analysis of this tool and so its validity and reliability are untested. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the eHNA by examining its construct validity. Objectives were to (a) test whether the eHNA measured holistic concerns and (b) analyse the factor structure of the eHNA. Objectives were achieved through a secondary analysis of 5421 responses to eHNA using concurrent application of Rasch analysis and principal component analysis. All the items bar one fit with the Rasch rating model and were equivalently important to people. Differential item functioning was evident according to whether people were described as curative or not. A 12-factor solution explained 46 % variance. Of this the emotional/spiritual factor explained the most variance accounting for 15 %. The eHNA was internally consistent and conceptually coherent with the construct of holistic needs assessment. Clinical focus is best directed to the individual items highlighted by the patient except where patients check too many problems for the clinician to accurately prioritise. In these cases only, the emotional/spiritual factor may help identify appropriate clinical action. Strengths and weaknesses of the analyses are discussed, particularly in relation to ‘at risk’ subsamples such as those classified as non-curative. Springer International Publishing 2015-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4628027/ /pubmed/26543758 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1401-0 Text en © Snowden and Fleming. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Snowden, Austyn
Fleming, Mick
Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title_full Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title_fullStr Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title_short Validation of the electronic Holistic Needs Assessment
title_sort validation of the electronic holistic needs assessment
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26543758
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1401-0
work_keys_str_mv AT snowdenaustyn validationoftheelectronicholisticneedsassessment
AT flemingmick validationoftheelectronicholisticneedsassessment