Modifying a generic postoperative recovery profile instrument to an instrument specifically targeting coronary artery bypass grafting

Placing patient-reported outcomes at the centre of cardiovascular clinical practice: implications for quality of care and management

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide important insights into patients' own perspectives about their health and medical condition, and there is evidence that their use can lead to improvements in the quality of care and to better-informed clinical decisions. Their application in cardiovascular populations has grown over the past decades. This statement describes what PROs are, and it provides an inventory of disease-specific and domain-specific PROs that have been developed for cardiovascular populations. International standards and quality indices have been published, which can guide the selection of PROs for clinical practice and in clinical trials and research; patients as well as experts in psychometrics should be involved in choosing which are most appropriate. Collaborations are needed to define criteria for using PROs to guide regulatory decisions, and the utility of PROs for comparing and monitoring the quality of care and for allocating resources should be evaluated. New sources for recording PROs include wearable digital health devices, medical registries, and electronic health record. Advice is given for the optimal use of PROs in shared clinical decision-making in cardiovascular medicine, and concerning future directions for their wider application.

Psychometric Evaluation of the Postoperative Recovery Profile

Aim

To further evaluate the postoperative recovery profile regarding its psychometric properties.

Background

The postoperative recovery profile is an instrument for the self-assessment of general postoperative recovery that has received increased attention within nursing research. However, psychometric evaluation during development was sparse.

Design

Psychometric evaluation was done using classical test theory.

Method

Data quality, targeting, reliability, and scaling assumptions were measured. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate construct validity. Data collection was made during 2011-2013.

Result

Data derived from this study showed acceptable quality; however, item distribution was skewed, with ceiling effects in the majority of items. Cronbach's alpha showed high internal consistency. Item-total correlations indicated unidimensionality, whereas six items demonstrated high correlations pointing at redundancy. The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed problems related to dimensionality as the five proposed dimensions were highly correlated with each other. Furthermore, items were largely uncorrelated with the designated dimensions.

Conclusion

This study shows that the postoperative recovery profile needs to be further developed to serve as a robust instrument within nursing as well as medical research. Arguably, values from the instrument should not be calculated at a dimensional level for the time being because of discriminant validity issues.