Christian Evensen

Giving voice to the vulnerable: the development of a CAHPS nursing home survey measuring family members' experiences.

Background:To complement a nursing home resident survey, the team developed a survey asking family members about their experiences with nursing homes. Although a family member does not receive care directly from a nursing home, their experiences at the nursing home and with staff can contribute to understanding nursing home quality. Objectives:To describe how the nursing home family member instrument was developed, refined, tested, and finalized. Research Design:The team developed a draft survey using information from a literature review, 12 focus groups with family members involved in choosing a nursing home for someone, review of nursing home surveys, and expert/stakeholder input. The survey went through 2 rounds of cognitive interviews (n=54) and revisions and was fielded in 15 nursing homes. Data from the pilot survey (n=885) were subjected to psychometric analyses to evaluate the measurement properties of items as well as the reliability and validity of the resulting composites. On the basis of these analyses and input from experts, the survey was finalized. Results:Focus groups and experts provided input into discerning important indicators of quality, although in some cases family members were not the best sources of information. Cognitive testing refined the survey and eliminated some of the proxy items. The field test analysis and input from experts eliminated 10 items. The final survey included 21 items organized into 4 composites. Conclusions:This survey measures family members’ experiences of nursing home care, and the results contribute to the understanding of quality of care in nursing homes.

Knowledge and Behavioral Effects in Cardiovascular Health: Community Health Worker Health Disparities Initiative, 2007–2010

Introduction Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the United States, and disparities in cardiovascular health exist among African Americans, American Indians, Hispanics, and Filipinos. The Community Health Worker Health Disparities Initiative of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) includes culturally tailored curricula taught by community health workers (CHWs) to improve knowledge and heart-healthy behaviors in these racial/ethnic groups. Methods We used data from 1,004 community participants in a 10-session curriculum taught by CHWs at 15 sites to evaluate the NHLBI’s health disparities initiative by using a 1-group pretest–posttest design. The curriculum addressed identification and management of cardiovascular disease risk factors. We used linear mixed effects and generalized linear mixed effects models to examine results. Results Average participant age was 48; 75% were female, 50% were Hispanic, 35% were African American, 8% were Filipino, and 7% were American Indian. Twenty-three percent reported a history of diabetes, and 37% reported a family history of heart disease. Correct pretest to posttest knowledge scores increased from 48% to 74% for heart healthy knowledge. The percentage of participants at the action or maintenance stage of behavior change increased from 41% to 85%. Conclusion Using the CHW model to implement community education with culturally tailored curricula may improve heart health knowledge and behaviors among minorities. Further studies should examine the influence of such programs on clinical risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

Quality of care in sickle cell disease: Cross-sectional study and development of a measure for adults reporting on ambulatory and emergency department care.

AbstractDocumented deficiencies in adult sickle cell disease (SCD) care include poor access to knowledgeable providers and inadequate treatment in emergency departments (EDs).The aim of this study was to create patient-reported outcome measures of the quality of ambulatory and ED care for adults with SCD.We developed and pilot tested SCD quality of care questions consistent with Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys. We applied psychometric methods to develop scores and evaluate reliability and validity.The participants of this study were adults with SCD (n = 556)—63% aged 18 to 34 years; 64% female; 64% SCD-SS—at 7 US sites.The measure used was Adult Sickle Cell Quality of Life Measurement information system Quality of Care survey.Most participants (90%) reported at least 1 severe pain episode (pain intensity 7.8 ± 2.3, 0–10 scale) in the past year. Most (81%) chose to manage pain at home rather than the ED, citing negative ED experiences (83%). Using factor analysis, we identified Access, Provider Interaction, and ED Care composites with reliable scores (Cronbach &agr; 0.70–0.83) and construct validity (r = 0.32–0.83 correlations with global care ratings). Compared to general adult Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems scores, adults with SCD had worse care, adjusted for age, education, and general health.Results were consistent with other research reflecting deficiencies in ED care for adults with SCD. The Adult Sickle Cell Quality of Life Measurement Quality of Care measure is a useful self-report measure for documenting and tracking disparities in quality of SCD care.

Formative research on patient experiences with cancer care.

274 Background: The objectives of the formative research were to identify key themes of patient-centered cancer care and determine the best method to collect data to develop the CAHPS Survey for Cancer Care Prototype. This survey seeks to measure aspects of care most important to patients and allow comparisons of those aspects across treatment centers and treatment modalities. METHODS We developed a library of 1,781 items from CAHPS and cancer care surveys. We conducted 14 focus groups with patients (including 2 conducted in Spanish) who had received cancer care in the past 12 months, and 2 focus groups involving family members of cancer patients. We met with 10 experts representing patients and survivors, or who had expertise in quality improvement, oncology, shared decision-making and patient safety to obtain feedback on the development of the survey, potential markets for the instrument, and to assist with overall strategy. Finally, we conducted separate interviews with 5 stakeholder groups representing oncology associations to obtain feedback on focal provider, attribution and sampling. RESULTS While the focus group results validated findings from the item library, new concepts also emerged, such as the need for having a plan of care. Patients most readily identified with a team of providers, rather than a single provider. The two most important domains to patients were (1) how well the cancer care team communicates with patients and (2) whether the cancer care team keeps patients informed about cancer treatment. Patients were also interested in care coordination, access to information, providers who are up-to-date, and shared decision-making. Stakeholder interviews noted that survey results would be most valuable if presented by treatment modality: medical, radiation, and surgical oncology. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that cancer care is best for the patient when providers are knowledgeable and straightforward with medical information, yet can demonstrate empathy and compassion.