• Jamie M Boyd, Rachael Burton, Barb L Butler, Dianne Dyer, David C Evans, Melissa Felteau, Russell L Gruen, Kenneth M Jaffe, John Kortbeek, Eddy Lang, Val Lougheed, Lynne Moore, Michelle Narciso, Peter Oxland, Frederick P Rivara, Derek Roberts, Diana Sarakbi, Karen Vine, and Henry T Stelfox.
• *Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada †Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada ‡Brain Injury Association of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada §Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada ¶Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ||Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore **Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA ††Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada ‡‡Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada §§Calgary ¶¶Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université Laval, Québec, Canada ||||Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA ***Accreditation Canada †††Departments of Critical Care Medicine, Medicine and Community Health Sciences, O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
• Ann. Surg. 2016 Sep 8.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the content validity of quality criteria for providing patient- and family-centered injury care.BackgroundQuality criteria have been developed for clinical injury care, but not patient- and family-centered injury care.MethodsUsing a modified Research AND Development Corporation (RAND)/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a panel of 16 patients, family members, injury and quality of care experts serially rated and revised criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care identified from patient and family focus groups. The criteria were then sent to 384 verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand for evaluation.ResultsA total of 46 criteria were rated and revised by the panel over 4 rounds of review producing 14 criteria related to clinical care (n = 4; transitions of care, pain management, patient safety, provider competence), communication (n = 3; information for patients/families; communication of discharge plans to patients/families, communication between hospital and community providers), holistic care (n = 4; patient hygiene, kindness and respect, family access to patient, social and spiritual support) and end-of-life care (n = 3; decision making, end-of-life care, family follow-up). Medical directors, managers, or coordinators representing 254 trauma centers (66% response rate) rated 12 criteria to be important (95% of responses) for patient- and family-centered injury care. Fewer centers rated family access to the patient (80%) and family follow-up after patient death (65%) to be important criteria.ConclusionsFourteen-candidate quality criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care were developed and shown to have content validity. These may be used to guide quality improvement practices.

17 keywords...

hide…