Susan Rodiek1, Adeleh Nejati2, Eric Bardenhagen3, Chanam Lee3, Giulio Senes4. 1. Department of Architecture, Center for Health Systems & Design, Texas A&M University, College Station. rodiek@tamu.edu. 2. Department of Architecture, Center for Health Systems & Design, Texas A&M University, College Station. 3. Department of Landscape Architecture & Urban Planning, Center for Health Systems & Design, Texas A&M University, College Station. 4. GIS & Rural Landscape Planning, Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To describe the development and psychometric testing of the Seniors' Outdoor Survey (SOS), an instrument for evaluating how well the outdoor space in a long-term care setting supports the preferences and outdoor usage of residents. DESIGN AND METHODS: Content validity of the main SOS items initially was based on relevant literature and preliminary studies in diverse long-term care settings. After conducting a multiregional pilot study with 152 outdoor spaces at 68 assisted living facilities, the instrument was substantially revised and tested for interrater and test-retest reliability with 22 outdoor spaces at 12 long-term care settings, using 2 raters. Validity was examined using content analysis of resident survey responses (N = 1,128) from the multiregional study and specific item validation by subject matter experts (N = 53). RESULTS: The final instrument contains 60 ratable items organized in 5 domains: access to nature (14 items), outdoor comfort and safety (15 items), walking and outdoor activities (14 items), indoor-outdoor connection (11 items), and connection to the world (6 items). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates of interrater reliability were .91 for the overall instrument, ranging from .83 to .98 for the 5 domains. Interrater reliability (ICC) was above .70 for more than 79% of individual items. Test-retest reliability (ICC) was .92, ranging from .81 to .98 for domains. IMPLICATIONS: The SOS tool fills a gap in the available environmental assessment instruments, providing a reliable way for researchers, providers, and designers to evaluate and compare the supportive potential of outdoor spaces for long-term care residents.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To describe the development and psychometric testing of the Seniors' Outdoor Survey (SOS), an instrument for evaluating how well the outdoor space in a long-term care setting supports the preferences and outdoor usage of residents. DESIGN AND METHODS: Content validity of the main SOS items initially was based on relevant literature and preliminary studies in diverse long-term care settings. After conducting a multiregional pilot study with 152 outdoor spaces at 68 assisted living facilities, the instrument was substantially revised and tested for interrater and test-retest reliability with 22 outdoor spaces at 12 long-term care settings, using 2 raters. Validity was examined using content analysis of resident survey responses (N = 1,128) from the multiregional study and specific item validation by subject matter experts (N = 53). RESULTS: The final instrument contains 60 ratable items organized in 5 domains: access to nature (14 items), outdoor comfort and safety (15 items), walking and outdoor activities (14 items), indoor-outdoor connection (11 items), and connection to the world (6 items). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates of interrater reliability were .91 for the overall instrument, ranging from .83 to .98 for the 5 domains. Interrater reliability (ICC) was above .70 for more than 79% of individual items. Test-retest reliability (ICC) was .92, ranging from .81 to .98 for domains. IMPLICATIONS: The SOS tool fills a gap in the available environmental assessment instruments, providing a reliable way for researchers, providers, and designers to evaluate and compare the supportive potential of outdoor spaces for long-term care residents.
Authors: M P Lawton; G D Weisman; P Sloane; C Norris-Baker; M Calkins; S I Zimmerman Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2000 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Philip D Sloane; C Madeline Mitchell; Gerald Weisman; Sheryl Zimmerman; Kristie M Long Foley; Mary Lynn; Margaret Calkins; M Powell Lawton; Jeanne Teresi; Leslie Grant; David Lindeman; Rhonda Montgomery Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Marco Boffi; Linda Grazia Pola; Elisabetta Fermani; Giulio Senes; Paolo Inghilleri; Barbara Ester Adele Piga; Gabriele Stancato; Natalia Fumagalli Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-08-30