Search

BackgroundThe US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services assess patient experiences of care as part of the end-stage renal disease prospective payment system and Quality Incentive Program. This article describes the development and evaluation of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) In-Center Hemodialysis Survey.Study designWe conducted formative research to generate survey questions and performed statistical analyses to evaluate the survey's measurement properties.Setting & participantsFormative research included focus groups, cognitive interviews, and field testing the survey with dialysis patients.Measurements & outcomesWe assessed internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) and center-level reliability for 3 multi-item scales. We evaluated construct validity using correlations of the scales with global ratings of the kidney doctor, staff, and dialysis center.ResultsResponse rate was 46% (1,454 completed surveys). Analyses support 3 multi-item scales: Nephrologists' Communication and Caring (7 items, alpha=0.89), Quality of Dialysis Center Care and Operations (22 items, alpha=0.93), and Providing Information to Patients (11 items, alpha=0.75). The communication scale was correlated the most strongly with the global rating of the "kidney doctor" (r=0.78). The Dialysis Center Care and Operations scale was correlated most strongly with global ratings of staff (r=0.75) and the center (r=0.69). Providing Information to Patients was correlated most strongly with the global rating of the staff (r=0.41).LimitationsA relatively small number of patients completed the survey in Spanish.ConclusionsThis study provides support for the reliability and validity of the CAHPS In-Center Hemodialysis Survey for assessing patient experiences of care at dialysis facilities. The survey can be used to compare care provided at different facilities.

Objective. To describe translation and cultural adaptation procedures, and examine the degree of equivalence between the Spanish and English versions of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Hospital Survey (H-CAHPS®) of patient experiences with care. Data Sources. Cognitive interviews on survey comprehension with 12 Spanish-speaking and 31 English-speaking subjects. Psychometric analyses of 586 responses to the Spanish version and 19,134 responses to the English version of the H-CAHPS survey tested in Arizona, Maryland, and New York in 2003. Study Design. A forward/backward translation procedure followed by committee review and cognitive testing was used to ensure a translation that was both culturally and linguistically appropriate. Responses to the two language versions were compared to evaluate equivalence and assess the reliability and validity of both versions. Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Comparative analyses were carried out on the 32 items of the shortened survey version, focusing on 16 items that comprise seven composites representing different aspects of hospital care quality (communication with nurses, communication with doctors, communication about medicines, nursing services, discharge information, pain control, and physical environment); three items that rate the quality of the nursing staff, physician staff, and the hospital overall; one item on intention to recommend the hospital. The other 12 items used in the analyses addressed mainly respondent characteristics. Analyses included item descriptives, correlations, internal consistency reliability of composites, factor analysis, and regression analysis to examine construct validity. Principal Findings. Responses to both language versions exhibit similar patterns with respect to item–scale correlations, factor structure, content validity, and the association between each of the seven qualities of care composites with both the hospital rating and intention to recommend the hospital. Internal consistency reliability was slightly, yet significantly lower for the Spanish-language respondents for five of the seven composites, but overall the composites were generally equivalent across language versions. Conclusions. The results provide preliminary evidence of the equivalence between the Spanish and English versions of H-CAHPS. The translated Spanish version can be used to assess hospital quality of care for Spanish speakers, and compare results across these two language groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To enable an existing survey on primary care so that it can be used to assess the healthcare experiences reported by adults living with disabilities, and to evaluate its properties., Methods: Mixed-methods study. We first identified content areas for measurement as compared to the items in the existing instrument and then developed new candidate items. Cognitive testing was conducted in English and Spanish. After revisions to the primary care instrument based on the cognitive testing results, the draft-enabled instrument was field-tested by mail with telephone follow-up, in English and Spanish., Results: Consumer focus groups and a technical expert panel identified eight content areas in primary care that are particularly important to maximise function and well-being of people of with disabilities. Cognitive testing also revealed serious problems with several items in the existing survey when answered by or about people with disabilities. Field testing yielded 1086 surveys, of which 40% were completed by a proxy respondent. Learning disabilities were reported by 38% of respondents. Item non-response for revised and new questions was less than 4%., Conclusions: It is feasible to enable a survey of primary care and its administration. Survey administration instructions should be modified to accommodate proxy respondents. The screener item to identify people with mobility impairments on walking a distance should be replaced with walking for 6 min. Adding questions from the American Community Survey about functional ability will allow survey sponsors to identify respondents with various limitations, and to compare their experiences to those of people with no limitations. Careful development and testing of the items with input from interested parties throughout the design and testing stages yielded a survey with good psychometric properties and content validity in multiple languages. Health delivery systems can use the survey data to identify clinical processes needing improvement to provide high quality care for people with disabilities.