Literature DB >> 24287821

Quality of care in an IVF programme from a patient's perspective: development of a validated instrument.

Herborg Holter1, Ann-Kristin Sandin-Bojö, Ann-Louise Gejervall, Matts Wikland, Bodil Wilde-Larsson, Christina Bergh.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: Is it possible to develop a trustworthy instrument to evaluate the patient's perspective on fertility care and to document fully all methodological steps, including validation? SUMMARY ANSWER: A validated instrument has been developed for both women and men undergoing assisted reproduction to monitor the quality of care on a regular basis, similar to live birth rates and other effectiveness data. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: Within fertility care, several instruments have been developed, but many have significant methodological problems and few have been validated. Most instruments focus exclusively on women and no questionnaires have been directed at women and men separately. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION: The questionnaire specific to IVF treatments (QPP-IVF) is based on the theoretical foundation of the validated general instrument, quality of care from patients perspective (QPP), for both women and men. The QPP-IVF was developed and validated by quantitative methods. A two-centre study ran between September 2011 and May 2012. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: In all, 655 women and men participated. The measurements consisted of two kinds of evaluations: the rating of perceived reality of care and the rating of the subjective importance of various aspects of treatment. The questionnaire consisted of 43 items for women and 42 items for men. An exploratory factor analysis was performed for women for all items of subjective importance. Eigenvalue, explained variance and factor loading are given for each factor. Internal consistency of subscales was assessed by Cronbach's alpha, item discriminant validity and percentage scaling success. For external validity, a correlation with fertility quality of life (FertiQoL) was performed and for reliability, a test-retest analysis was carried out. Sensitivity analyses were performed by known-group analyses. All significance tests were two sided and conducted at the 5% significance level. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The QPP-IVF instrument, divided into four dimensions, seemed a valid and reliable way of measuring the quality of care from a patient's perspective, for both women and men. The item-scaling test confirmed 10 underlying factors, with scaling success in all subscales and Cronbach's alpha >0.70 for women in almost all subscales. It was somewhat lower for men but still acceptable. The external validity was acceptable, with significant correlation between QPP-IVF and FertiQoL. The test-retest analysis confirmed that QPP-IVF was a stable instrument, with intra-class correlation coefficients from 0.74 to 0.89 for women. Sensitivity analyses indicated a sensitive instrument. LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION: The response rate to the questionnaire was 67.5%. Although considered acceptable in questionnaire studies, this response level might introduce a certain risk of selection bias. The questionnaire was developed and validated only in Sweden. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: The QPP-IVF may be of use for purposes of quality improvement and national comparisons. Future studies should focus on establishing the QPP-IVF as a valuable instrument for measuring the quality of care outside Sweden. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST: The study was supported by the LUA/ALF agreement at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden and by Hjalmar Svensson's Research Foundation. None of the authors declared any conflict of interests.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IVF; measurement instrument; quality care; validation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24287821     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/det421

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  7 in total

1.  The effect of male and female factor infertility on women's anxiety, depression, self-esteem, quality of life and sexual function parameters: a prospective, cross-sectional study from Turkey.

Authors:  Deniz Kulaksiz; Tuncay Toprak; Basar Ayribas; Eda Ozcan; Umut Arslan; Nur Dokuzeylul Gungor
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 2.  A review of patient-reported outcome measures to assess female infertility-related quality of life.

Authors:  Helen Kitchen; Natalie Aldhouse; Andrew Trigg; Roberto Palencia; Stephen Mitchell
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.186

3.  Development of a Short Form of the Questionnaire Quality from the Patient's Perspective for Palliative Care (QPP-PC).

Authors:  Tuva Sandsdalen; Vigdis Abrahamsen Grøndahl; Bodil Wilde-Larsson
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2020-06-12

4.  Lost and lonely: a qualitative study of women's experiences of no embryo transfer owing to non-fertilization or poor embryo quality.

Authors:  Herborg Holter; Christina Bergh; Ann-Louise Gejervall
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-01-19

5.  Patients' perceptions of palliative care: adaptation of the Quality from the Patient's Perspective instrument for use in palliative care, and description of patients' perceptions of care received.

Authors:  Tuva Sandsdalen; Ingrid Rystedt; Vigdis Abrahamsen Grøndahl; Reidun Hov; Sevald Høye; Bodil Wilde-Larsson
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 3.234

6.  Perceived quality of physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage compared with standard practice in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Karin S Samsson; Susanne Bernhardsson; Maria E H Larsson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  A conceptual framework for patient-centered fertility treatment.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Duthie; Alexandra Cooper; Joseph B Davis; Katherine D Schoyer; Jay Sandlow; Estil Y Strawn; Kathryn E Flynn
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 3.223

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.