Paul Slater1, Tanya McCance2, Brendan McCormack3,4,5,6,7,8,9. 1. Institute of Nursing and Health Research, Ulster University, Belfast, Northern Ireland. 2. The Institute for Nursing and Health Research, The Person-centred Practice Research Centre, Ulster University, Belfast, Northern Ireland. 3. PGCEA, RGN, RMN, FRCN, FEANS, The Division of Nursing. 4. Queen Margaret University Graduate School, Edinburgh, UK. 5. Centre for Person-centred Practice Research, Queen Margaret University Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 6. University College of South-East Norway, Drammen, Norway. 7. University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. 8. Maribor University, Maribor, Slovenia. 9. Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop and test an instrument, underpinned by a recognized theoretical framework, that examines how staff perceive person-centred practice, using proven methods of instrument design and psychometric analysis. DESIGN: The study used a mixed method multiphase research design involving: two Delphi studies to agree definitions and items to measure the constructs aligned to the person-centred practice theoretical framework (Phase 1); and a large-scale quantitative cross-sectional survey (Phase 2). SETTING: Phase 1 was an international study involving representatives from seven countries across Europe and Australia, with Phase 2 conducted in one country across five organizations. PARTICIPANTS: Two international panels of experts (n = 33) in person-centred practice took part in the Delphi study and a randomly selected sample of registered nurses (n = 703, 23.8%) drawn from across a wide range of clinical settings completed the Person-centred Practice Inventory - Staff (PCPI-S). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome is to establish a measure of staff perceptions of person-centred Practice. RESULTS: Broad consensus on definitions relating to 17 constructs drawn from a person-centred practice framework was achieved after two rounds; likewise with the generation of 108 items to measure the constructs; a final instrument comprising 59 items with proven psychometric properties was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: The PCPI-S is psychometrically acceptable instrument validated by an international expert panel that maps specifically to a theoretical framework for person-centred practice and provides a generic measure of person-centredness.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop and test an instrument, underpinned by a recognized theoretical framework, that examines how staff perceive person-centred practice, using proven methods of instrument design and psychometric analysis. DESIGN: The study used a mixed method multiphase research design involving: two Delphi studies to agree definitions and items to measure the constructs aligned to the person-centred practice theoretical framework (Phase 1); and a large-scale quantitative cross-sectional survey (Phase 2). SETTING: Phase 1 was an international study involving representatives from seven countries across Europe and Australia, with Phase 2 conducted in one country across five organizations. PARTICIPANTS: Two international panels of experts (n = 33) in person-centred practice took part in the Delphi study and a randomly selected sample of registered nurses (n = 703, 23.8%) drawn from across a wide range of clinical settings completed the Person-centred Practice Inventory - Staff (PCPI-S). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome is to establish a measure of staff perceptions of person-centred Practice. RESULTS: Broad consensus on definitions relating to 17 constructs drawn from a person-centred practice framework was achieved after two rounds; likewise with the generation of 108 items to measure the constructs; a final instrument comprising 59 items with proven psychometric properties was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: The PCPI-S is psychometrically acceptable instrument validated by an international expert panel that maps specifically to a theoretical framework for person-centred practice and provides a generic measure of person-centredness.
Authors: Adeline Dorough; Derek Forfang; Shannon L Murphy; James W Mold; Abhijit V Kshirsagar; Darren A DeWalt; Jennifer E Flythe Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Anthony W Olson; Timothy P Stratton; Brian J Isetts; Rajiv Vaidyanathan; Jared C Van Hooser; Jon C Schommer Journal: J Multidiscip Healthc Date: 2021-04-29
Authors: Pia Cecilie Bing-Jonsson; Paul Slater; Brendan McCormack; Lisbeth Fagerström Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 2.655