Cargando…
Construction and content validation of a measurement tool to evaluate person-centered therapeutic relationships in physiotherapy services
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to develop a tool for evaluating person-centered therapeutic relationships within physiotherapy services, and to examine the content validity of the same. METHODS: A mixed qualitative and quantitative study was performed in three distinct phases: 1) the items were gener...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7051061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32119676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228916 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: This study sought to develop a tool for evaluating person-centered therapeutic relationships within physiotherapy services, and to examine the content validity of the same. METHODS: A mixed qualitative and quantitative study was performed in three distinct phases: 1) the items were generated based on a literature review and a content analysis of focus groups of patients and physiotherapists; 2) an e-Delphi survey process was performed based on three rounds to select and refine the proposed questionnaire; 3) two rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted to evaluate the comprehension of items, the clarity of language and the appropriateness and relevance of content. RESULTS: Thirty-one items were generated based on the seven domains identified after the analysis of four focus groups of physiotherapists and four patient focus groups. Nine experts participated in the e-Delphi survey. Fifty-five patients participated in the two rounds of the cognitive pre-tests. Participating patients were from public and private physical therapy services. Based on the participants’ suggestions, four items were removed, and four were added, whereas 16 were reworded. CONCLUSIONS: The final tool comprised 31 items divided into seven domains. The response format was based on a 5-point Likert frequency scale. The response options ranged from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. |
---|