Development the Care Evaluation Scale Version 2.0: a modified version of a measure for bereaved family members to evaluate the structure and process of palliative care for cancer patient

Miyashita, Mitsunori; Aoyama, Maho; Nakahata, Misato; Yamada, Yuji; Abe, Mutsumi; Yanagihara, Kazuhiro; Shirado, Akemi; Shutoh, Mariko; Okamoto, Yoshiaki; Hamano, Jun; Miyamoto, Aoi; Yoshida, Saki; Sato, Kazuki; Hirai, Kei; Morita, Tatsuya

doi:10.1186/s12904-017-0183-2

Cited by 37 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Moderate ? Moderate 2 SAT-Fam-IPC (FC) [ 35 ] 1 − Moderate + Moderate + Moderate Unknown Unknown 2 CES-10 4 (FC) [ 32 ] 1 Unknown + Moderate 2 FPPFC (FC) [ 7 ] 1 + Moderate ? Moderate ?…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For tools where data grouping was not possible, the FATE (Family Assessment of Treatment at the End of life)-32 [ 29 ], FAMCARE (Family satisfaction with end-of-life Care)-5 and -10 [ 30 ], CODE (Caring Of the Dying Evaluation) [ 31 ], FPPFC (Family Perceptions of Physician-Family Caregiver Communication) [ 7 ], and MDS-Mood [ 7 ] were all assigned a positive rating for internal consistency ( α = 0.74–0.94) but with varying levels of evidence. For reliability, the Japanese versions of the CES (Care Evaluation Scale) and CES-10 [ 32 ] had moderate levels of evidence for positive test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.82–0.83). FATE-32 [ 29 ], CQ-Index-PC (Consumer Quality Index Palliative Care) [ 33 ], QPM-SF (Post Mortem Questionnaire-Short Form) [ 34 ], SAT-Fam-IPC (Satisfaction Scale for Family members receiving Inpatient Palliative Care) [ 35 ], CES [ 36 ], and CODE [ 31 ] all had strong to moderate levels of evidence of positive content validity, with strong evidence for QPM-SF [ 34 ] and CODE [ 31 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tools Measuring Quality of Death, Dying, and Care, Completed after Death: Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties

Kupeli

Candy

Tamura-Rose

et al. 2018

Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Measuring the quality of care at the end of life and/or the quality of dying and death can be challenging. Some measurement tools seek to assess the quality of care immediately prior to death; others retrospectively assess, following death, the quality of end-of-life care. The comparative evaluation of the properties and application of the various instruments has been limited. Objective This systematic review identified and critically appraised the psychometric properties and applicability of tools used after death. Method We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by systematically searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for relevant studies. We then appraised the psychometric properties and the quality of reporting of the psychometric properties of the identified tools using the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) checklist. The protocol of this systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016047296). Results The search identified 4751 studies. Of these, 33 met the inclusion criteria, reporting on the psychometric properties of 67 tools. These tools measured quality of care at the end of life (n = 35), quality of dying and death (n = 22), or both quality of care at the end of life and dying and death (n = 10). Most tools were completed by family carers (n = 57), with some also completed by healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 2) or just HCPs (n = 8). No single tool was found to be adequate across all the psychometric properties assessed. Two quality of care at the end of life tools-Care of the Dying Evaluation and Satisfaction with Care at the End of Life in Dementia-had strong psychometric properties in most respects. Two tools assessing quality of dying and death-the Quality of Dying and Death and the newly developed Staff Perception of End of Life Experience-had limited to moderate evidence of good psychometric properties. Two tools assessing both quality of care and quality of dying and death-the Quality Of Dying in Long-Term Care for cognitively intact populations and Good Death Inventory (Korean version)-had the best psychometric properties. Conclusion Four tools demonstrated some promise, but no single tool was consistent across all psychometric properties assessed. All tools identified would benefit from further psychometric testing.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tools Measuring Quality of Death, Dying, and Care, Completed after Death: Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties

Kupeli

Candy

Tamura-Rose

et al. 2018

Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The short version of the CES consists of 10 representative items from each domain, and the validity and reliability of the scale have been confirmed [ 13 ]. We will use the revised short version of the CES (CES2) in the current study [ 18 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Japan hospice and palliative evaluation study 4: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundConstant evaluation is important for maintaining and improving the quality of end-of-life care. We therefore conduct the fourth Japan Hospice and Palliative Evaluation Study (J-HOPE4) as a continuous evaluation study. In this present paper, we describe the design of J-HOPE4. The main purposes of J-HOPE4 are as follows:1) to evaluate the processes, structures, and outcomes of palliative care acute hospitals, palliative care units, and home hospice services; 2) to examine bereaved family members’ self-reported psychosocial conditions, such as grief and depression as bereavement outcomes;3) to provide data to ensure and improve the quality of care provided by participating institutions via feedback based on the results from each institution; and 4) provide clinical and academic information concerning the implications of various issues in palliative care by conducting additional studies.MethodsWe will conduct a cross-sectional, anonymous, self-reported questionnaire survey. In total, 190 institutions will participate in this study, meaning that 12,000 bereaved family members will be sent a questionnaire.DiscussionThis is one of the largest cross-sectional surveys involving hospice and palliative care, both in Japan and worldwide. Because this study will have a large sample size, the findings are expected to be generalizable to other settings.

show abstract

“…Also, the use of FAMCARE with bereaved family members is not well-established. Although FAMCARE has been used in bereaved family members in international studies [27], this has not been done or tested in Portugal. For the reasons, it was necessary to validate an instrument that could be used across care settings and applied to bereaved family members.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the CANHELP Lite Bereavement Questionnaire

Pereira¹,

Ferreira²,

Abrantes³

et al. 2020

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Satisfaction with care is an important outcome measure in end-of-life care. Validated instruments are necessary to evaluate and disseminate interventions that improve satisfaction with care at the end of life, contributing to improving the quality of care offered at the end of life to the Portuguese population. The purpose of this study was to perform a cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric analysis of the Portuguese version of the CANHELP Lite Bereavement Questionnaire. Methods: Methodological research with an analytical approach that includes translation, semantic, and cultural adaptation. Results: The Portuguese version comprised 24 items. A panel of experts and bereaved family members found it acceptable and that it had face and content validity. A total of 269 caregivers across several care settings in the northern region of Portugal were recruited for further testing. The internal consistency analysis of the adapted instrument resulted in a global alpha value of 0.950. The correlation between the adapted CANHELP questionnaire and a global rating of satisfaction was of 0.886 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The instrument has good psychometric properties. It was reliable and valid in assessing caregivers’ satisfaction with end-of-life care and can be used in both clinical and research settings.

show abstract

Development the Care Evaluation Scale Version 2.0: a modified version of a measure for bereaved family members to evaluate the structure and process of palliative care for cancer patient

Cited by 37 publications

References 27 publications

Tools Measuring Quality of Death, Dying, and Care, Completed after Death: Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties

Tools Measuring Quality of Death, Dying, and Care, Completed after Death: Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties

The Japan hospice and palliative evaluation study 4: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey

Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the CANHELP Lite Bereavement Questionnaire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About