R Ruiz-Moral1, L A Pérula de Torres. 1. Grupo Comunicación la Salud, Unidad Docente de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina, Nodo COGRAMA (redIAPP), Córdoba, Spain. roger.ruz.sspa@juntadeandalucia.es
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity and reliability of a tool for evaluating the clinical communication skills of health professionals. DESIGN: Descriptive study of the validation of a tool. SETTING: Primary and specialist care. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty communication experts, in 31 interviews with patients seen by real and standardised nurses, primary care, and specialist doctors, residents with acute and chronic patients. INTERVENTIONS: The study looked at a 36-item, multidimensional evaluative scale on 3 levels, based on the CICAA theoretical model of an interview and examined: 1) its apparent validity, consensus, and content: the clinical communication experts made 2 assessments, a qualitative one and one to weigh the importance of the remaining items; 2) its internal consistency and intra-observer reliability. An expert evaluated 31 interviews, video-recorded on 2 occasions with a 1-to-2 month interval. RESULTS: A 29-item scale was obtained. Cronbach's alpha was 0.957 (95% CI, 0.932-0.976). The overall Intra-class Correlation Coefficient was 0.967 (95% CI, 0.933-0.984). The Kappa values of the items were <0.4 in 3, 0.4-0.6 in 6, 0.6-0.8 in 14, and >0.8 in 4. CONCLUSIONS: The CICAA is a valid and reliable questionnaire for evaluating the clinical communication between various health professionals and patients.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity and reliability of a tool for evaluating the clinical communication skills of health professionals. DESIGN: Descriptive study of the validation of a tool. SETTING: Primary and specialist care. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty communication experts, in 31 interviews with patients seen by real and standardised nurses, primary care, and specialist doctors, residents with acute and chronic patients. INTERVENTIONS: The study looked at a 36-item, multidimensional evaluative scale on 3 levels, based on the CICAA theoretical model of an interview and examined: 1) its apparent validity, consensus, and content: the clinical communication experts made 2 assessments, a qualitative one and one to weigh the importance of the remaining items; 2) its internal consistency and intra-observer reliability. An expert evaluated 31 interviews, video-recorded on 2 occasions with a 1-to-2 month interval. RESULTS: A 29-item scale was obtained. Cronbach's alpha was 0.957 (95% CI, 0.932-0.976). The overall Intra-class Correlation Coefficient was 0.967 (95% CI, 0.933-0.984). The Kappa values of the items were <0.4 in 3, 0.4-0.6 in 6, 0.6-0.8 in 14, and >0.8 in 4. CONCLUSIONS: The CICAA is a valid and reliable questionnaire for evaluating the clinical communication between various health professionals and patients.
Authors: Enrique Gavilán Moral; Roger Ruiz Moral; Luis Angel Perula de Torres; Juan Manuel Parras Rejano Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2009-09-25 Impact factor: 1.137
Authors: Marcela Urtasun; Vanesa Denise Labanca; Paula González Pannia; Luisa De Rochebouët; Romina Chiappino; Fernando Claudio Ferrero; María Fabiana Ossorio; Fernando Adrian Torres Journal: Rev Fac Cien Med Univ Nac Cordoba Date: 2021-06-28
Authors: Manuel González-Cabrera; Ana Raquel Ortega-Martínez; Juan Miguel Martínez-Galiano; Antonio Hernández-Martínez; Laura Parra-Anguita; Antonio Frías-Osuna Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-10 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Francisco Javier Valverde Bolívar; Miguel Pedregal González; María Francisca Pérez Fuentes; María Dolores Alcalde Molina; Jesús Torío Durántez; Miguel Delgado Rodríguez Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 1.137
Authors: Nuria Rico-Sapena; María Eugenia Galiana-Sánchez; Joaquín Moncho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-20 Impact factor: 3.390