David A Harrison1, Paloma Ferrando-Vivas2, Stephen E Wright3, Elaine McColl4, Daren K Heyland5, Kathryn M Rowan2. 1. Clinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: david.harrison@icnarc.org. 2. Clinical Trials Unit, Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre, London, United Kingdom. 3. Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 4. Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 5. Clinical Evaluation Research Unit, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To establish the psychometric properties of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item (FS-ICU-24) questionnaire in the United Kingdom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation study recruited family members of patients staying at least 24 hours in 20 participating intensive care units. Questionnaires were evaluated for nonresponse, floor/ceiling effects, redundancy, and construct validity. Internal consistency was evaluated with item-to-own scale correlations and Cronbach α. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were used to explore the underlying structure. RESULTS: Twelve thousand three hundred forty-six family members of 6380 patients were recruited and 7173 (58%) family members of 4615 patients returned a completed questionnaire. One family member per patient was included in the psychometric assessment. Six items had greater than 10% nonresponse; 1 item had a ceiling effect; and 11 items had potential redundancy. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α, overall .96; satisfaction with care, .94; satisfaction with decision making, .93). The 2-factor solution was not a good fit. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that satisfaction with decision making encompassed 2 constructs-satisfaction with information and satisfaction with the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: The Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item questionnaire demonstrated good psychometric properties in the United Kingdom setting. Construct validity could be improved by use of 3 domains and some scope for further improvement was identified.
PURPOSE: To establish the psychometric properties of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item (FS-ICU-24) questionnaire in the United Kingdom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation study recruited family members of patients staying at least 24 hours in 20 participating intensive care units. Questionnaires were evaluated for nonresponse, floor/ceiling effects, redundancy, and construct validity. Internal consistency was evaluated with item-to-own scale correlations and Cronbach α. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were used to explore the underlying structure. RESULTS: Twelve thousand three hundred forty-six family members of 6380 patients were recruited and 7173 (58%) family members of 4615 patients returned a completed questionnaire. One family member per patient was included in the psychometric assessment. Six items had greater than 10% nonresponse; 1 item had a ceiling effect; and 11 items had potential redundancy. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α, overall .96; satisfaction with care, .94; satisfaction with decision making, .93). The 2-factor solution was not a good fit. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that satisfaction with decision making encompassed 2 constructs-satisfaction with information and satisfaction with the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: The Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item questionnaire demonstrated good psychometric properties in the United Kingdom setting. Construct validity could be improved by use of 3 domains and some scope for further improvement was identified.
Authors: Olivia Brookes; Celia Brown; Carolyn Tarrant; Julian Archer; Duncan Buckley; Lisa Marie Buckley; Ian Clement; Felicity Evison; Fang Gao Smith; Chris Gibbins; Emma Hayton; Jennifer Jones; Richard Lilford; Randeep Mullhi; Greg Packer; Gavin Perkins; Jonathan Shelton; Catherine Snelson; Paul Sullivan; Ivo Vlaev; Daniel Wolstenholme; Stephen E Wright; Julian Bion Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Paloma Ferrando; Doug W Gould; Emma Walmsley; Alvin Richards-Belle; Ruth Canter; Steven Saunders; David A Harrison; Sheila Harvey; Daren K Heyland; Lisa Hinton; Elaine McColl; Annette Richardson; Michael Richardson; Stephen E Wright; Kathryn M Rowan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Kevin Hummel; Angela P Presson; Morgan M Millar; Gitte Larsen; Howard Kadish; Lenora M Olson Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 3.971