• BMJ quality & safety · Apr 2017

    Assessing content validity and user perspectives on the Team Check-up Tool: expert survey and user focus groups.

    • Jill A Marsteller, Yea-Jen Hsu, Kitty S Chan, and Lisa H Lubomski.
    • Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
    • BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Apr 1; 26 (4): 288-295.

    ObjectiveThis study assesses content validity and user feedback on the Team Check-up Tool (TCT), an instrument used for measuring dynamic context of quality improvement (QI) teams and their implementation of QI activities.MethodsWe conducted two focus groups and one larger feedback session with TCT users to assess feasibility, importance of areas of inquiry and barriers to use. A panel of eight QI experts evaluated the item-by-item content (content validity) of TCT by rating the relevance of each item to implementation success. We calculated item-level and scale-level content validity using the content validity index (CVI).ResultsScale-level CVI was 0.872. Highly rated items included implementation of recommended interventions, educational activities, team review of performance data, team sharing of performance data with staff and specific barriers to progress. Four items were rated relatively low: presentation of performance data to the hospital/health system board; manner of provision of feedback of data to staff; to what other units the team attempted to spread and turnover of QI team members. Items identified in user focus groups as important included whether there were events distracting staff from the initiative, number of team meetings and turnover of QI team members. Focus groups also identified barriers to the completion of the tool, including lack of feedback and response fatigue during stable activity periods.ConclusionThe findings support the conclusion that the TCT measures meaningful areas of context and implementation in team-based QI initiatives, particularly intervention activity tracking, review and sharing of performance data and team progress barriers. We offer a modified instrument with a framework for real-time measurement of important elements of implementation and context of QI teams based on the findings.Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…