Development of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure Tool for Ambulatory Patients With Acute Unexpected Needs: The APEX Questionnaire.

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Patient Experience Pub Date : 2024-04-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23743735241229373
Myriam Nadeau, Dominique Chabot, Mylaine Breton, Jason R Guertin, Laurie Harvey Labbé, Danièle Roberge, Gabrielle Lefebvre, Myriam Mallet, Sandrine Beaulieu, Éric Kavanagh, Nathalie Cloutier, Philippe Garant, Lynda Bélanger, Samuel Vaillancourt, Tarek Boumenna, Kathryn Bareil, Joanie Savard, David Simonyan, Mahukpe Narcisse Ulrich Singbo, Simon Berthelot
{"title":"Development of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure Tool for Ambulatory Patients With Acute Unexpected Needs: The APEX Questionnaire.","authors":"Myriam Nadeau, Dominique Chabot, Mylaine Breton, Jason R Guertin, Laurie Harvey Labbé, Danièle Roberge, Gabrielle Lefebvre, Myriam Mallet, Sandrine Beaulieu, Éric Kavanagh, Nathalie Cloutier, Philippe Garant, Lynda Bélanger, Samuel Vaillancourt, Tarek Boumenna, Kathryn Bareil, Joanie Savard, David Simonyan, Mahukpe Narcisse Ulrich Singbo, Simon Berthelot","doi":"10.1177/23743735241229373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The aim of this study was to develop a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for comparing the experience of care received by ambulatory patients with acute unexpected needs presenting in emergency departments (EDs), walk-in clinics, and primary care practices. <b>Methods:</b> The Ambulatory Patient EXperience (APEX) questionnaire was developed using a 5-phase mixed-methods approach. The questionnaire was pretested by asking potential users to rate its clarity, usefulness, redundancy, content and face validities, and discrimination on a 9-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 9 = strongly agree). The pre-final version was then tested in a pilot study. <b>Results:</b> The final questionnaire is composed of 61 questions divided into 7 sections. In the pretest (n = 25), median responses were 8 and above for all dimensions assessed. In the pilot study, 63 participants were enrolled. Adjusted results show that access, cleanliness, and feeling treated with respect and dignity by nurses and physicians were significantly better in the clinics than in the ED. <b>Conclusion:</b> We developed a questionnaire to assess and compare experience of ambulatory care in different clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":45073,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Experience","volume":"11 ","pages":"23743735241229373"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11010752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Experience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23743735241229373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to develop a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for comparing the experience of care received by ambulatory patients with acute unexpected needs presenting in emergency departments (EDs), walk-in clinics, and primary care practices. Methods: The Ambulatory Patient EXperience (APEX) questionnaire was developed using a 5-phase mixed-methods approach. The questionnaire was pretested by asking potential users to rate its clarity, usefulness, redundancy, content and face validities, and discrimination on a 9-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 9 = strongly agree). The pre-final version was then tested in a pilot study. Results: The final questionnaire is composed of 61 questions divided into 7 sections. In the pretest (n = 25), median responses were 8 and above for all dimensions assessed. In the pilot study, 63 participants were enrolled. Adjusted results show that access, cleanliness, and feeling treated with respect and dignity by nurses and physicians were significantly better in the clinics than in the ED. Conclusion: We developed a questionnaire to assess and compare experience of ambulatory care in different clinical settings.

为有紧急意外需求的门诊病人开发病人体验报告测量工具:APEX 问卷。
研究背景本研究旨在开发一种患者报告的体验测量方法(PREM),用于比较在急诊科(ED)、无预约门诊和初级保健诊所就诊的有紧急突发需求的非住院病人所获得的护理体验。方法:门诊病人体验(APEX)问卷采用五阶段混合方法开发。通过让潜在用户对问卷的清晰度、实用性、冗余性、内容和表面有效性以及区分度进行9分制评分(1分=非常不同意,9分=非常同意),对问卷进行了预测试。然后在试点研究中对最终版本进行了测试。结果:最终问卷由 61 个问题组成,分为 7 个部分。在预试(n = 25)中,所有评估维度的回答中位数均在 8 及以上。在试点研究中,有 63 人参加。调整后的结果显示,诊所的就医环境、清洁度以及受到护士和医生尊重的感觉明显优于急诊室。结论:我们编制了一份调查问卷,用于评估和比较不同临床环境下的非住院护理体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Experience
Journal of Patient Experience HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
178
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信