• JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg · Jan 2017

    Stakeholder-Engaged Measure Development for Pediatric Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing: The Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Adenotonsillectomy Knowledge Scale for Parents.

    • Anne R Links, David E Tunkel, and Emily F Boss.
    • Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
    • JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Jan 1; 143 (1): 46-54.

    ImportanceParental decision making about adenotonsillectomy (AT) for obstructive sleep-disordered breathing (oSDB) is associated with decisional conflict that may be alleviated with improved knowledge about symptoms and treatments.ObjectiveTo develop a measure of parental knowledge about oSDB and AT.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsA sequential design was used for scale development. A prototype measure containing 9 oSDB and AT themes and 85 items was administered in survey format via an online platform. Participants included 19 clinician experts (otolaryngologists and pediatricians) and 13 laymen (parents of children who snore or do not snore, and other adults). Quantitative and qualitative responses were used to modify the measure and create the knowledge scale. Content validity of the scale was established through expert feedback and evaluation. Criterion validity was established with t test comparisons of experts with laymen. Reliability of the responses was assessed with Cronbach α testing.Main Outcomes And MeasuresAn 85-item prototype measure and 39-item modified measure were evaluated for consensus/approval and psychometric integrity.ResultsOf 45 potential participants, 32 individuals (71%) responded to the prototype scale. Respondents included 19 clinician experts (59%) (otolaryngologists and pediatricians) and 13 laymen (41%) (parents of children who snore [n = 8] or do not snore [n = 2] and other adults [n = 3]); demographic data were not collected. Content analysis and qualitative feedback were largely rated positively: 27 respondents (84%) stated that the measure was a good evaluation of knowledge, 30 respondents (94%) commented that the items were clear, and 31 individuals (97%) approved of its organization, although there were several suggestions for rewording and/or addition of response options. Experts identified themes most important for assessing oSDB (symptoms) and AT (experiences: risks and benefits) knowledge. These qualitative comments were used to modify the scale, and items were eliminated if more than 2 were reported as misleading or less than 85% of clinicians provided correct responses. Five themes (oSDB symptoms, treatment options, AT risks, anesthesia, and AT benefits) and 39 items composed the final scale. Experts scored higher than laymen on the oSDB and AT Knowledge Scale for Parents overall (17 [94%] vs 12 [67%]; Cohen d = 1.96; 95% CI, 1.05-2.86) and within all themes, including experiences of children with oSDB (19 [88%] vs 13 [62%]; Cohen d = 1.53; 95% CI, 0.71-2.32), treatment options (19 [97%] vs 12 [68%]; Cohen d = 1.74; 95% CI, 0.88-2.57), AT risks (17 [97%] vs 12 [59%]; Cohen d = 1.94; 95% CI, 1.03-2.83), anesthesia (17 [97%] vs 12 [79%]; Cohen d = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.29-1.88), and AT benefits (17 [95%] vs 12 [67%]; Cohen d = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.46-2.09), demonstrating criterion validity. All responses demonstrated high reliability (Cronbach α = 0.94).Conclusions And RelevanceThe oSDB and AT Knowledge Scale for Parents is psychometrically sound for use in the assessment of parental knowledge.

      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…