Eva Christalle, Stefan Zeh, Hannah Führes, Alica Schellhorn, Pola Hahlweg, Jördis Maria Zill, Martin Härter, Carsten Bokemeyer, Jürgen Gallinat, Christoffer Gebhardt, Christina Magnussen, Volkmar Müller, Katharina Schmalstieg-Bahr, André Strahl, Levente Kriston, Isabelle Scholl
{"title":"通过患者的眼睛：64 项体验式患者中心感问卷（EPAT-64）的心理测量评估。","authors":"Eva Christalle, Stefan Zeh, Hannah Führes, Alica Schellhorn, Pola Hahlweg, Jördis Maria Zill, Martin Härter, Carsten Bokemeyer, Jürgen Gallinat, Christoffer Gebhardt, Christina Magnussen, Volkmar Müller, Katharina Schmalstieg-Bahr, André Strahl, Levente Kriston, Isabelle Scholl","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are valuable tools to evaluate patient-centredness (PC) from the patients' perspective. Despite their utility, a comprehensive PREM addressing PC has been lacking. To bridge this gap, we developed the preliminary version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT), a disease-generic tool based on the integrative model of PC comprising 16 dimensions. It demonstrated content validity. This study aimed to test its psychometric properties and to develop a final 64-item version (EPAT-64).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, we included adult patients treated for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, musculoskeletal diseases and mental disorders in inpatient or outpatient settings in Germany. For each dimension of PC, we selected four items based on item characteristics such as item difficulty and corrected item-total correlation. We tested structural validity using confirmatory factor analysis, examined reliability by McDonald's Omega and tested construct validity by examining correlations with general health status and satisfaction with care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of data from 2.024 patients showed excellent acceptance and acceptable item-total correlations for all EPAT-64 items, with few items demonstrating ceiling effects. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated the best fit for a bifactor model, where each item loaded on both a general factor and a dimension-specific factor. Omega showed high reliability for the general factor, while varying for specific dimensions. Construct validity was confirmed by absence of strong correlations with general health status and a strong correlation of the general factor with satisfaction with care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EPAT-64 demonstrated commendable psychometric properties. This tool allows comprehensive assessment of PC, offering flexibility to users who can measure each dimension with a four-item module or choose modules based on their needs. EPAT-64 serves multiple purposes, including quality improvement and evaluation of interventions aiming to enhance PC. Its versatility empowers users in diverse healthcare settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":9077,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Quality & Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Through the patients' eyes: psychometric evaluation of the 64-item version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT-64).\",\"authors\":\"Eva Christalle, Stefan Zeh, Hannah Führes, Alica Schellhorn, Pola Hahlweg, Jördis Maria Zill, Martin Härter, Carsten Bokemeyer, Jürgen Gallinat, Christoffer Gebhardt, Christina Magnussen, Volkmar Müller, Katharina Schmalstieg-Bahr, André Strahl, Levente Kriston, Isabelle Scholl\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017434\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are valuable tools to evaluate patient-centredness (PC) from the patients' perspective. Despite their utility, a comprehensive PREM addressing PC has been lacking. To bridge this gap, we developed the preliminary version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT), a disease-generic tool based on the integrative model of PC comprising 16 dimensions. It demonstrated content validity. This study aimed to test its psychometric properties and to develop a final 64-item version (EPAT-64).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, we included adult patients treated for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, musculoskeletal diseases and mental disorders in inpatient or outpatient settings in Germany. For each dimension of PC, we selected four items based on item characteristics such as item difficulty and corrected item-total correlation. We tested structural validity using confirmatory factor analysis, examined reliability by McDonald's Omega and tested construct validity by examining correlations with general health status and satisfaction with care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of data from 2.024 patients showed excellent acceptance and acceptable item-total correlations for all EPAT-64 items, with few items demonstrating ceiling effects. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated the best fit for a bifactor model, where each item loaded on both a general factor and a dimension-specific factor. Omega showed high reliability for the general factor, while varying for specific dimensions. Construct validity was confirmed by absence of strong correlations with general health status and a strong correlation of the general factor with satisfaction with care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EPAT-64 demonstrated commendable psychometric properties. This tool allows comprehensive assessment of PC, offering flexibility to users who can measure each dimension with a four-item module or choose modules based on their needs. EPAT-64 serves multiple purposes, including quality improvement and evaluation of interventions aiming to enhance PC. Its versatility empowers users in diverse healthcare settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Quality & Safety\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Quality & Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017434\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Quality & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017434","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Through the patients' eyes: psychometric evaluation of the 64-item version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT-64).
Background: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are valuable tools to evaluate patient-centredness (PC) from the patients' perspective. Despite their utility, a comprehensive PREM addressing PC has been lacking. To bridge this gap, we developed the preliminary version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT), a disease-generic tool based on the integrative model of PC comprising 16 dimensions. It demonstrated content validity. This study aimed to test its psychometric properties and to develop a final 64-item version (EPAT-64).
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we included adult patients treated for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, musculoskeletal diseases and mental disorders in inpatient or outpatient settings in Germany. For each dimension of PC, we selected four items based on item characteristics such as item difficulty and corrected item-total correlation. We tested structural validity using confirmatory factor analysis, examined reliability by McDonald's Omega and tested construct validity by examining correlations with general health status and satisfaction with care.
Results: Analysis of data from 2.024 patients showed excellent acceptance and acceptable item-total correlations for all EPAT-64 items, with few items demonstrating ceiling effects. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated the best fit for a bifactor model, where each item loaded on both a general factor and a dimension-specific factor. Omega showed high reliability for the general factor, while varying for specific dimensions. Construct validity was confirmed by absence of strong correlations with general health status and a strong correlation of the general factor with satisfaction with care.
Conclusions: EPAT-64 demonstrated commendable psychometric properties. This tool allows comprehensive assessment of PC, offering flexibility to users who can measure each dimension with a four-item module or choose modules based on their needs. EPAT-64 serves multiple purposes, including quality improvement and evaluation of interventions aiming to enhance PC. Its versatility empowers users in diverse healthcare settings.
期刊介绍：
BMJ Quality & Safety (previously Quality & Safety in Health Care) is an international peer review publication providing research, opinions, debates and reviews for academics, clinicians and healthcare managers focused on the quality and safety of health care and the science of improvement.
The journal receives approximately 1000 manuscripts a year and has an acceptance rate for original research of 12%. Time from submission to first decision averages 22 days and accepted articles are typically published online within 20 days. Its current impact factor is 3.281.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
