Search

Objective: To develop parsimonious German scales (CollaboRATEpediatric) to assess shared decision making (SDM) with patients aged 7-18 years, parents and parents on behalf of their children (parent-proxy reports), and to establish comprehensibility and preliminary face validity.Methods: Based on an existing SDM scale for adults (CollaboRATE) we developed CollaboRATEpediatric in a two-step approach: (1) team-based translation of the English CollaboRATE scale into German and adaptation for pediatric patients, parents and parent-proxy reports, followed by (2) iterative revisions of the CollaboRATEpediatric scales based on cognitive interviews with patients and parents until comprehensibility and preliminary face validity were established.Results: Taking into account seven problem areas identified in four rounds of cognitive interviews (e.g., item complexity) we developed CollaboRATEpediatric scales for patients, parents and parent-proxy reports. By iteratively revising items we were able to resolve all problem areas and achieved full comprehensibility and intended interpretation of all items.Conclusion: The scales enable the parsimonious assessment of SDM with pediatric patients and parents as well as comparisons between the two groups. Future empirical work will establish the psychometric performance of CollaboRATEpediatric.Practice Implications: CollaboRATEpediatric can be used in quality improvement initiatives to foster the comprehensive implementation of SDM in pediatrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: to explore pregnant women's experiences with the recently implemented screening for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Design: qualitative study. Setting: Rhine-Neckar Metropolitan region, Germany. Participants: 20 pregnant women aged 27-41 years (mean: 32.6 years) who were at least in gestational week 29, i.e., those who should have already been screened for GDM. Measurements and findings: semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions were conducted via telephone between November 2013 and February 2014. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and subsequently analyzed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. The screening was seen as an important instrument to detect GDM and thus to prevent possible health problems in both mother and child. Some deviations from the recommended screening procedure were reported in the interviews, e.g., collecting capillary blood instead of venous blood during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); offering an OGTT without a prior glucose challenge test (GCT); conducting a GCT after an overnight fast. Two women had to actively ask for the screening to be done. One woman reported that her gynaecologist advised her against the screening. Conclusion and implication for practice: this qualitative study reflects the women's experiences with the new screening for GDM. Our findings show that two years after the introduction of universal GDM screening in Germany the screening procedure does not always seem to meet the standards of the German maternity guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To conduct a preliminary evaluation of psychometric properties of CollaboRATEpediatric, a set of three scales to assess shared decision making (SDM) with pediatric patients, parents and parents on behalf of their children (parent-proxy reports). As secondary objectives we examined the scales' distributional characteristics, acceptability, and agreement between scales.Methods: Patients aged ≥ 7 years and parents were recruited in two outpatient facilities providing healthcare services for children with neurological and behavioral health conditions. We collected 46, 169 and 227 pediatric patient, parent-proxy and parent reports, respectively. Convergent, divergent and discriminative validity were investigated. Acceptability of the scales and agreement between patient and parent-proxy reports were explored by assessing item nonresponse and Bland-Altman plots.Results: While convergent and divergent validity were established for the parent scale, discriminative validity was not demonstrated for any of the scales. The scales showed good to excellent acceptability. Parent-proxy reports agreed to a moderate extent with patients' self-reports of SDM.Conclusion: CollaboRATEpediatric offers a starting point for parsimoniously assessing SDM in Pediatrics, however further psychometric testing is warranted.Practice Implications: Given limited psychometric support for the pediatric patient scale, we recommend using both the pediatric patient and parent-proxy report scales to assess SDM in pediatric patients until further psychometric testing is concluded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]