Do practicing clinicians agree with expert ratings of neonatal intensive care unit quality measures?

Do practicing clinicians agree with expert ratings of neonatal intensive care unit quality measures?
复制标题

DOI:
10.1038/jp.2011.199
复制
发表时间:
2012-04
影响因子:
2.9
通讯作者:
Profit, J.
Profit, J.
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Kowalkowski, M.;Gould, J. B.;Bose, C.;Petersen, L. A.;Profit, J.

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

评估两个小组在选择纳入新生儿重症监护质量综合指数(Baby-MONITOR)的质量指标时的一致性水平:一个小组由学术研究人员(德尔菲)组成,另一个小组由学术和临床儿科医生(临床医生)组成。在一个修改后的德尔菲过程中,一个小组对28个质量指标进行了评级。我们通过调查48名新生儿重症监护医生的样本,评估了临床医生与德尔菲小组的一致性。我们要求临床医生组使用五点量表(太高、略高、合理、略低和太低)来表明他们与德尔菲小组对每项测量的一致程度。此外,我们要求临床医生根据是或否投票以及预先规定的三分之二多数票选择纳入婴儿监测器的措施。23名(47.9%)临床医生回答了调查。我们发现德尔菲和临床医生小组之间的一致性很高,特别是在为婴儿监护仪选择的测量中。临床医生选择了与德尔菲小组相同的9项指标纳入复合指标。对于这9项指标,74%的临床医生表示,德尔菲小组评级是“合理的”。执业临床医生同意专家小组的措施,应包括在婴儿监测,提高表面效度。
To assess the level of agreement when selecting quality measures for inclusion in a composite index of neonatal intensive care quality (Baby-MONITOR) between two panels: one comprised of academic researchers (Delphi) and another comprised of academic and clinical neonatologists (Clinician). In a modified Delphi process, a panel rated twenty eight quality measures. We assessed clinician agreement with the Delphi panel by surveying a sample of forty eight neonatal intensive care practitioners. We asked the clinician group to indicate their level of agreement with the Delphi panel for each measure using a five- point scale (much too high, slightly too high, reasonable, slightly too low, and much too low). In addition, we asked clinicians to select measures for inclusion in the Baby-MONITOR based on a yes or no vote and a pre-specified two-thirds majority for inclusion. Twenty three (47.9%) of the clinicians responded to the survey. We found high levels of agreement between the Delphi and clinician panels, particularly across measures selected for the Baby-MONITOR. Clinicians selected the same nine measures for inclusion in the composite as the Delphi panel. For these nine measures, 74% of clinicians indicated that the Delphi panel rating was ‘reasonable’. Practicing clinicians agree with an expert panel on the measures that should be included in the Baby-MONITOR, enhancing face validity.
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2006-1565
发表时间: 2007-05-01
期刊: PEDIATRICS
影响因子: 8
作者:
Profit, Jochen;Zupancic, John A. F.;Petersen, Laura A.
通讯作者: Petersen, Laura A.
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2007-3501
发表时间: 2009-01-01
期刊: PEDIATRICS
影响因子: 8
作者:
Rojas, Mario Augusto;Manuel Lozano, Juan;Lucia Jaramillo, Martha
通讯作者: Lucia Jaramillo, Martha
DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-13
发表时间: 2010-02-09
期刊: Implementation science : IS
影响因子: --
作者:
Profit J;Typpo KV;Hysong SJ;Woodard LD;Kallen MA;Petersen LA
通讯作者: Petersen LA
DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa072788
发表时间: 2008-02-14
影响因子: 158.5
作者:
Morley, Colin J.;Davis, Peter G.;Carlin, John B.
通讯作者: Carlin, John B.
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2009-2131
发表时间: 2010-06-01
期刊: PEDIATRICS
影响因子: 8
作者:
Sandri, Fabrizio;Plavka, Richard;Halliday, Henry
通讯作者: Halliday, Henry