| Autor: |
Harrison R; Centre for Health Systems and Safety, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia., Ellis LA; Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia., Sina M; Centre for Health Systems and Safety, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia., Walsan R; Centre for Health Systems and Safety, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia., Mitchell R; Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia., Walpola R; School of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia., Maberly G; Western Sydney Diabetes, Blacktown and Western Sydney Local Health District, NSW 2151, Australia., Chan C; Strategic Reform Branch, NSW Ministry of Health, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia., Hay L; Strategic Reform Branch, NSW Ministry of Health, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia. |
| Abstrakt: |
Objective Clinician's experiences of providing care are identified as a key outcome associated with value-based healthcare (VBHC). In contrast to patient-reported experience measures, measurement tools to capture clinician's experiences in relation to VBHC initiatives have received limited attention to date. Progressing from an initial 18-item clinician experience measure (CEM), we sought to develop and evaluate the reliability of a set of 10 core clinician experience measure items in the CEM-10. Methods A multi-method project was conducted using a consensus workshop with clinicians from a range of NSW Health local health districts to reduce the 18-item CEM to a short form 10-item core clinician experience measure (CEM-10). The CEM-10 was deployed with clinicians providing diabetes care, care for older adults and virtual care across all districts and care settings of New South Wales, Australia. Psychometric analysis was used to determine the internal consistency of the tool and its suitability for diverse clinical contexts. Results Consensus building sessions led to a rationalised 10-item tool, retaining the four domains of psychological safety (two items), quality of care (three items), clinician engagement (three items) and interprofessional collaboration (two items). Data from four clinician cohorts (n = 1029) demonstrated that the CEM-10 four-factor model produced a good fit to the data and high levels of reliability, with factor loadings ranging from 0.77 to 0.92, with Cronbach's alpha (range: 0.79-0.90) and composite reliability (range: 0.80-0.92). Conclusions The CEM-10 provides a core set of common clinician experience measurement items that can be used to compare clinician's experiences of providing care between and within cohorts. The CEM-10 may be supported by additional items relevant to particular initiatives when evaluating VBHC outcomes. |
