Development and validation of a survey designed to measure patient experience of and preference for surgical wound care discharge education: A pilot study

Georgia Tobiano; Wendy Chaboyer; Joan Carlini; Anne M Eskes; Elizabeth McInnes; Sharon Latimer; Rhonda Boorman; Zena Moore; Ann-Mari Fagerdahl; Rachel M Walker; Annette Erichsen Andersson; Tom O'Connor; Evelyn Kang; Rosalind Probert; Brigid M Gillespie

doi:10.1016/j.jtv.2023.06.003

Development and validation of a survey designed to measure patient experience of and preference for surgical wound care discharge education: A pilot study

J Tissue Viability. 2023 Aug;32(3):442-448. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.06.003. Epub 2023 Jun 15.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; Nursing and Midwifery Education and Research Unit, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Australia. Electronic address: g.tobiano@griffith.edu.au.
² National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia; Skin Wounds and Trauma (SWaT) Research Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland.
³ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; Department of Marketing, Griffith University, Australia; Consumer Advisory Group, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Australia.
⁴ School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Netherlands.
⁵ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; St Vincent's Health Network Sydney, Australia; St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne (SVHM), Australia; Australian Catholic University, Australia.
⁶ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia.
⁷ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia.
⁸ School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia; Skin Wounds and Trauma (SWaT) Research Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland; School of Nursing & Midwifery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences Ulster University, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom; Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium; Lida Institute, Shanghai, China; Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom; Fakeeh College of Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
⁹ Department of Clinical Research and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.
¹⁰ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia; Division of Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Australia.
¹¹ Caring Science and Health, University of Gothenburg, Sweden; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden.
¹² School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia; Skin Wounds and Trauma (SWaT) Research Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland; School of Nursing & Midwifery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland; Lida Institute, Shanghai, China; Fakeeh College of Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
¹³ School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia.
¹⁴ Stomal Therapy Wound Management Department Division of Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Australia.
¹⁵ National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; Nursing and Midwifery Education and Research Unit, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia.

PMID: 37349230
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.06.003

Abstract

Aim of the study: To develop and undertake validation testing of a survey designed to measure patients' experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education.

Materials and methods: A literature review and content analysis was undertaken on patients' experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education. Four themes were uncovered in the literature (wound care discharge education, preferences for discharge education delivery, participation in wound care decisions and patient ability to manage their surgical wound to prevent wound complications), which guided item generation. Three types of validity testing occurred including: 1) face validity testing by the research team; 2) content validity testing (using Delphi study) with an international panel of experts including patients, clinicians and researchers; and 3) content validity (using pilot-testing) of the survey with seven patients from the target population.

Results: Initially 106 items were generated from the literature, and of these, 55 items were subjected to content validity testing by an international panel of 41 experts. After two Delphi rounds, 18 items were retained. Most patients provided limited and very minor feedback during pilot-testing. However, pilot-testing resulted in a revised survey administration plan to deliver the survey via telephone, including adding prompts and preambles to items.

Conclusion: An 18-item survey comprised of three groups of items and an individual item was rigorously developed. The survey requires further testing among a larger sample of patients to confirm the items reflect important aspects of patients' experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education.

Keywords: Discharge education; Patient participation; Surgical wounds; Surveys and questionnaires; Wounds and injuries.

Publication types

Review

MeSH terms

Humans
Patient Discharge*
Patient Outcome Assessment
Pilot Projects
Reproducibility of Results
Surgical Wound*
Surveys and Questionnaires