Search

Background: As health services research (HSR) expands across the globe, researchers will adopt health services and health worker evaluation instruments developed in one country for use in another. This paper explores the cross-cultural methodological challenges involved in translating HSR in the language and context of different health systems. Objectives: To describe the pre-data collection systematic translation process used in a twelve country, eleven language nursing workforce survey. Design and settings: We illustrate the potential advantages of Content Validity Indexing (CVI) techniques to validate a nursing workforce survey developed for RN4CAST, a twelve country (Belgium, England, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland), eleven language (with modifications for regional dialects, including Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Spanish, and Swedish), comparative nursing workforce study in Europe. Participants: Expert review panels comprised of practicing nurses from twelve European countries who evaluated cross-cultural relevance, including translation, of a nursing workforce survey instrument developed by experts in the field. Methods: The method described in this paper used Content Validity Indexing (CVI) techniques with chance correction and provides researchers with a systematic approach for standardizing language translation processes while simultaneously evaluating the cross-cultural applicability of a survey instrument in the new context. Results: The cross-cultural evaluation process produced CVI scores for the instrument ranging from .61 to .95. The process successfully identified potentially problematic survey items and errors with translation. Conclusions: The translation approach described here may help researchers reduce threats to data validity and improve instrument reliability in multinational health services research studies involving comparisons across health systems and language translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

lodewijckx c., sermeus w., panella m., deneckere s., leigheb f., troosters t., boto p.a., mendes r.v., decramer m. & vanhaecht k. (2012) Quality indicators for in-hospital management of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results of an international Delphi study. Journal of Advanced Nursing 69(2), 348-362. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06013.x Abstract Aim. To report a Delphi study that was conducted to select process and outcome indicators that are relevant to study quality of care and impact of care pathways for patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Background. Management of patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is suboptimal and outcomes are poor. To evaluate the impact of care pathways properly, relevant indicators need to be selected. Design. Delphi study. Methods. The study was conducted over 4 months in 2008, with 35 experts out of 15 countries, including 19 medical doctors, 8 nurses and 8 physiotherapists. Participants were asked to rate, for 72 process and 21 outcome indicators, the relevance for follow-up in care pathways for in-hospital management of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Consensus (agreement by at least 75% of the participants) that an indicator is relevant for follow-up was sought in two rounds. Results. Consensus was reached for 26 of 72 process indicators (36·1%) and 10 of 21 outcome indicators (47·6%). Highest consensus levels were found for the process indicators regarding oxygen therapy (100%), pulmonary rehabilitation (100%) and patient education (94·5-88·6%) and for the outcome indicators concerning understanding of therapy (91·4-85·7%) and self-management (88·6-88·2%). Conclusion. The selected indicators appear to be sensitive for improvement. Therefore, researchers and clinicians that want to study and improve the care for patients hospitalized with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease should primarily focus on these indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]