Literature DB >> 18580383

Bridging From the Picker Hospital Survey to the CAHPS Hospital Survey.

Denise D Quigley1, Marc N Elliott, Ron D Hays, David J Klein, Donna O Farley.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Illustrate an accessible method of bridging data from earlier surveys to the CAHPS Hospital Survey to support hospitals' internal quality improvement efforts. DATA SOURCES/STUDY
SETTING: Survey of patients with more than 300,000 annual hospitalizations in a large urban hospital. STUDY DESIGN AND DATA: Six pairs of parallel items from the CAHPS and Picker Hospital Surveys were administered to the same 734 patients. We assessed item comparability and applied bridging adjustments to convert old items to predicted scores on the new CAHPS items. PRINCIPLE
FINDINGS: Differences in wording, response options, and cut points for "problem scores" yielded large differences in problem score rates between the Picker and CAHPS Hospital Surveys, requiring bridging formulas. Tetrachoric correlations for 5 of 6 pairs indicated high correspondence (r = 0.71-0.97, P < 0.001) in the underlying constructs assessed by the 2 surveys, validating the use of bridging. Bridged scores contain less information per observation than directly measured new scores, but with sufficient sample sizes they can be used to detect trends across the transition.
CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals can use the methodology described here to trend their scores from a previous survey to the CAHPS Hospital Survey with sufficient precision to support ongoing quality improvement efforts. Hospitals should administer an instrument containing pairs of old and new items to enough patients to yield at least 625 completes to measure bridging parameters precisely. Where correspondence is high, old items can and should be replaced by CAHPS items. Important old items with weaker associations with new items may be retained.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18580383     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817892d5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  2 in total

1.  The effects of survey version on patient experience scores and plan rankings.

Authors:  Megan K Beckett; Marc N Elliott; Q Burkhart; Paul D Cleary; Nate Orr; Julie A Brown; Sarah Gaillot; Karin Liu; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Quality of Patient-Centered Care Provided to Patients Attending Hematological Cancer Treatment Centers.

Authors:  Flora Tzelepis; Tara Clinton-McHarg; Christine L Paul; Robert W Sanson-Fisher; Douglas Joshua; Mariko L Carey
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 3.390

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.