Development and evaluation of an instrument to measure parental satisfaction with quality of care in neonatal follow-up

Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 57-65

  Butt, Michelle L ^a   Pinelli, Janet ^a   Boyle, Michael H ^a   Thomas, Helen ^a   Hunsberger, Mabel ^a   Saigal, Saroj ^a   Lee, David S ^b   Fanning, Jamie K ^c   Austin, Patricia ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b WESTERN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c ST JOSEPH S HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Instrument development; Neonatal follow up; Parent satisfaction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTENT VALIDITY; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SERVICE; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; METHODOLOGY; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; SATISFACTION; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; EVALUATION; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; INFANT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; NEWBORN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PARENT; PRESCHOOL CHILD; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

CHILD, PRESCHOOL; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PARENTS; PERSONAL SATISFACTION; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 64349122712     PISSN: 0196206X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e31819670fa     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Health Canada. Canadian Perinatal Health Report (Cat. No. H49-142/2003E). Ottawa, ON: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada; 2003. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/pphb-dgspsp/publicat/cphr- rspc03/index.html. Accessed April 10, 2008.
2. US Department of Health and Human Services National Center for Health Statistics. Births: final data for 2005. Nat Vital Stat Rep. 2007;56:1-104.
3. Hille ET, den Ouden AL, Saigal S, et al. Behavioural problems in children who weigh 1000g or less at birth in four countries. Lancet. 2001;357:1641-1643.
4. McGrath MM, Sullivan MC, Lester BM, Oh W. Longitudinal neurologic follow-up in neonatal intensive care unit survivors with various neonatal morbidities. Pediatrics. 2000;106:1397-1405.
5. Saigal S, Hoult LA, Streiner DL, Stoskopf BL, Rosenbaum PL. School difficulties at adolescence in a regional cohort of children who were extremely low birth weight. Pediatrics. 2000;105:323-331.
6. Feldman W, Pare C. Neonatal Follow-up Programs in Canada: Report of the Seventh Canadian Ross Conference in Paediatrics. Montreal, QC: Ross Laboratories; 1998.
7. Galbraith RS, Derrick EJ. The value of entry criteria in follow-up clinics for neonatal intensive care unit graduates. Paediatr Child Health. 1998;3:169-172.
8. Campbell MK, Halinda E, Carlyle MJ, Fox AM, Turner LA, Chance GW. Factors predictive of follow-up clinic attendance and developmental outcome in a regional cohort of very low birth weight infants. Am J Epidemiol. 1993;138:703-713.
9. Catlett AT, Thompson RJ, Johndrow DA, Boshkoff MR. Risk status for dropping out of developmental follow-up for very low birth weight infants. Public Health Rep. 1993;108:589-594.
10. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? J Am Med Assoc. 1998;260:1743-1748.
11. Ware JE, Davies-Avery A, Stewart AL. The measurement and meaning of patient satisfaction. Health Med Care Serv Rev. 1978;1:3-15.
12. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.
13. Morse JM, Richards L. Readme First for a User's Guide to Qualitative Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.
14. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Streiner DL, King DK. Clinical impact versus factor analysis for quality of life questionnaire construction. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;50:233-238.
15. Boyle MH, Offord DR, Racine YA, Fleming JE, Szatmari P, Sanford MN. Evaluation of the revised Ontario child health study scales. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1993;34:189-213.
16. Dillman DA. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1978.
17. Larsen DL, Attkisson CC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD. Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plann. 1979;2:197-207.
18. King SM, Rosenbaum PL, King GA. Parents' perceptions of caregiving: development and validation of a measure of processes. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1996;38:757-772.
19. Sinharay S, Stern HS, Russell D. The use of multiple imputation for the analysis of missing data. Psychol Methods. 2004;6:317-329.
20. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35:382-385.
21. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press; 2005.
22. Schumacker RE, Lomax RG. A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. 2nd ed. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2004.
23. Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2001.
24. Fonari C, Sherman M, Lipper E. Parental needs in a neonatal intensive care follow-up clinic. Neonatal Intensive Care. 1995;8: 32-34.
25. Hussey-Gardner BT, Wachtel RC, Viscardi RM. Parent perceptions of an NICU follow-up clinic. Neonatal Netw. 1998;17:33-39.
26. Schmidt P, Synnes AR. Expressed parental concerns to a neonatal follow-up clinic. Poster presented at the 2004 Pediatric Academic Societies' Annual Meeting; May 2004, San Francisco, CA.
27. Christianson H, Van Steenbergen K, Chappell C, Sauve R. A measure of parent satisfaction with a perinatal follow-up clinic. Poster presented at the IWK Grace Perinatal Conference on Prematurity; 2000, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
28. Marx RG, Bombardier C, Hogg-Johnson S, Wright JG. Clinimetric and psychometric strategies for development of a health measurement scale. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:105-111.
29. Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.