Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Quality of locally designed surveys in a quality improvement collaborative: review of survey validity and identification of common errors.
Reed, Julie E; Johnson, Julie K; Zanni, Robert; Messier, Randy; Asfour, Fadi; Godfrey, Marjorie M.
Afiliación
  • Reed JE; Julie Reed Consultancy Ltd, London, UK.
  • Johnson JK; Halmstad University School of Health and Welfare, Halmstad, Sweden.
  • Zanni R; Northwestern Quality Improvement, Research, and Education in Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  • Messier R; Robert Wood Johnson Barnabas Health Medical Group, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, New Jersey, USA.
  • Asfour F; University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA.
  • Godfrey MM; UTHSC, Utah, Utah, USA.
BMJ Open Qual ; 13(1)2024 02 16.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38365431
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Surveys are a commonly used tool in quality improvement (QI) projects, but little is known about the standards to which they are designed and applied. We aimed to investigate the quality of surveys used within a QI collaborative, and to characterise the common errors made in survey design.

METHODS:

Five reviewers (two research methodology and QI, three clinical and QI experts) independently assessed 20 surveys, comprising 250 survey items, that were developed in a North American cystic fibrosis lung transplant transition collaborative. Content Validity Index (CVI) scores were calculated for each survey. Reviewer consensus discussions decided an overall quality assessment for each survey and survey item (analysed using descriptive statistics) and explored the rationale for scoring (using qualitative thematic analysis).

RESULTS:

3/20 surveys scored as high quality (CVI >80%). 19% (n=47) of survey items were recommended by the reviewers, with 35% (n=87) requiring improvements, and 46% (n=116) not recommended. Quality assessment criteria were agreed upon. Types of common errors identified included the ethics and appropriateness of questions and survey format; usefulness of survey items to inform learning or lead to action, and methodological issues with survey questions, survey response options; and overall survey design.

CONCLUSION:

Survey development is a task that requires careful consideration, time and expertise. QI teams should consider whether a survey is the most appropriate form for capturing information during the improvement process. There is a need to educate and support QI teams to adhere to good practice and avoid common errors, thereby increasing the value of surveys for evaluation and QI. The methodology, quality assessment criteria and common errors described in this paper can provide a useful resource for this purpose.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Fibrosis Quística / Mejoramiento de la Calidad Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMJ Open Qual Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido Pais de publicación: Reino Unido
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Fibrosis Quística / Mejoramiento de la Calidad Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMJ Open Qual Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido Pais de publicación: Reino Unido