Evaluation of the measuring and improving quality in palliative care survey

Sydney M. Dy, Ritu Sharma, Kamini Kuchinad, Zi Rou Liew, Nebras Abu Al Hamayel, Susan M. Hannum, Junya Zhu, Arif H. Kamal, Anne M. Walling, Karl A. Lorenz, Sarina R. Isenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Purpose: To evaluate the reliability, content validity, and variation among sites of a survey to assess facilitators and barriers to quality measurement and improvement in palliative care programs. Methods: We surveyed a sample of diverse US and Canadian palliative care programs and conducted postcompletion discussion groups. The survey included constructs addressing educational support and training, communication, teamwork, leadership, and prioritization for quality measurement and improvement. We tested internal consistency reliability, described variation among sites, and reported descriptive feedback on content validity. Results: Of 103 respondents in 11 sites, the most common roles were attending physician (38.9%) and nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist, or physician assistant (16.5%). Internal consistency reliability was acceptable (Cronbach's a = .70 to .99) for all but one construct. Results varied across sites by more than 1 point on the 1 to 5 scales between the 10th and 90th percentiles of sites for two constructs in recognition and focus on quality measurement (score range by site, 1.7 to 4.8), one construct in teamwork (score range, 3.1 to 4.6), and five constructs in quality improvement (score range, 1.8 to 4.6). In descriptive content validity evaluation, respondents described the survey as an opportunity for assessing quality initiatives and discussing potential improvements, particularly improvements in communication, training, and engagement of team members regarding program quality efforts. Conclusion: This survey to assess palliative care team perspectives on barriers and facilitators for quality measurement and improvement demonstrated reliability, content validity, and initial evidence of variation among sites. Our findings highlight how palliative care team members' perspectives may be valuable to plan, evaluate, and monitor quality-of-care initiatives.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E834-E843
JournalJournal of oncology practice
Issue number12
StatePublished - Dec 1 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Oncology(nursing)
  • Health Policy


Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of the measuring and improving quality in palliative care survey'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this