RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Behaviour support plan (BSP) quality auditing tools like the Behaviour Intervention Plan Quality Evaluation, Version 2 (BIPQEII), assess the quality of a BSP from the perspective of technical compliance with behavioural principles. However, these principles may be inaccessible to interested stakeholders with limited experience and knowledge of positive behaviour support (PBS). The aim of this study was to test if a simplified version of the BIPQEII [the Behaviour Support Plan Audit Tool (BSPA-tool)] offers a reliable and valid assessment of a BSP's technical compliance with behavioural principles when used by professional stakeholders with varying levels of PBS experience and knowledge. METHODS: Four scorers rated 50 de-identified BSPs using the BSPA-tool, with one scorer also rating the BSPs using the BIPQEII. Four weeks later, each scorer rated 25 of the 50 BSPs again using the BSPA-tool. Prior to BSP scoring, a group of PBS practitioners provided feedback on the BSPA-tool's content validity. RESULTS: The BSPA-tool was found to have acceptable content and parallel-form validity; however, acceptable internal consistency and inter-rater and intra-rater reliability were dependent on PBS experience/knowledge, that is, scorers with more experience/knowledge achieved more acceptable levels of reliability. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that even with simplification, BSP quality auditing tools based on technical compliance with behavioural principles are still only accessible to stakeholders with extensive experience/knowledge of PBS. To engage less-experienced stakeholders in BSP quality auditing processes, new audit tools need to be developed that focus on other aspects of BSP quality (e.g. readability and consultation).
Asunto(s)
Derivación y Consulta , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery is one of the most common medical procedures undertaken worldwide. AIMS: To investigate whether cataract surgery can improve driving performance and whether this can be predicted by changes in visual function. METHODS: 29 older patients with bilateral cataracts and 18 controls with normal vision were tested. All were licensed drivers. Driving and vision performance were measured before cataract surgery and after second eye surgery for the patients with cataract and on two separate occasions for the controls. Driving performance was assessed on a closed-road circuit. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, glare sensitivity and kinetic visual fields were measured at each test session. RESULTS: Patients with cataract had significantly poorer (p<0.05) driving performance at the first visit than the controls for a range of measures of driving performance, which significantly improved to the level of the controls after extraction of both cataracts. The change in contrast sensitivity after surgery was the best predictor of the improvements in driving performance in patients with cataract. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract surgery results in marked improvements in driving performance, which are related to concurrent improvements in contrast sensitivity.