OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a newly developed survey tool measuring omissions in primary care. METHODS: The Errors of Care Omission Survey (ECOS) is the only known tool to measure critical omissions ("errors") in primary care from the perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs), both physicians and nurse practitioners. The tool has 31 items grouped into the following four subscales: Self-Management Support, Follow-up, Emotional Health Support, and Care Integration. A cross-sectional survey design was used to mail the tool to PCPs and 582 PCPs in one state in the U.S. completed and returned the survey. Exploratory factor analysis with target rotation was carried out. Internal consistency reliability of identified subscales was investigated. RESULTS: Four factors emerged representing domains of omissions in primary care. The original Follow-up and Care Integration subscales were retained. The items on Self-Management Support and Emotional Health Support subscales loaded differently on two factors, which were labeled Patient Self-Management and Family Engagement subscales, suggesting that conceptually PCPs separate patient and family involvement in patient care. Seven poorly performing or redundant items were removed. The remaining 24 items measure patient self-management, family engagement, follow-up, and care integration domains of omissions in primary care. The ECOS subscales have acceptable internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.90 to 0.97. CONCLUSIONS: The ECOS can be used in primary care to identify critical omissions, so actions can be taken by clinicians and administrators to prevent them before they result in patient harm. Further testing of the ECOS is recommended with diverse samples.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a newly developed survey tool measuring omissions in primary care. METHODS: The Errors of Care Omission Survey (ECOS) is the only known tool to measure critical omissions ("errors") in primary care from the perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs), both physicians and nurse practitioners. The tool has 31 items grouped into the following four subscales: Self-Management Support, Follow-up, Emotional Health Support, and Care Integration. A cross-sectional survey design was used to mail the tool to PCPs and 582 PCPs in one state in the U.S. completed and returned the survey. Exploratory factor analysis with target rotation was carried out. Internal consistency reliability of identified subscales was investigated. RESULTS: Four factors emerged representing domains of omissions in primary care. The original Follow-up and Care Integration subscales were retained. The items on Self-Management Support and Emotional Health Support subscales loaded differently on two factors, which were labeled Patient Self-Management and Family Engagement subscales, suggesting that conceptually PCPs separate patient and family involvement in patient care. Seven poorly performing or redundant items were removed. The remaining 24 items measure patient self-management, family engagement, follow-up, and care integration domains of omissions in primary care. The ECOS subscales have acceptable internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.90 to 0.97. CONCLUSIONS: The ECOS can be used in primary care to identify critical omissions, so actions can be taken by clinicians and administrators to prevent them before they result in patient harm. Further testing of the ECOS is recommended with diverse samples.
Authors: Ali S Saber Tehrani; HeeWon Lee; Simon C Mathews; Andrew Shore; Martin A Makary; Peter J Pronovost; David E Newman-Toker Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 7.035