Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Table 1 Summary of Content Validity Index (CVI)

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Table 1 Summary of Content Validity Index (CVI)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Table 1 Summary of Content Validity Index (CVI)
Development of Core Pain Competency Knowledge Tool for Pre-licensure Healthcare Students Keela Herr1, PhD, RN; Kathleen Sluka2, PhD, PT; Barbara St Marie1, PhD, RN; Dana Dailey2, PhD, PT; Nor Hashidah Abd Hamid3, PhD; Linda Hand1, PhD; Laurie Walkner3, MA, RN; Yelena Perkhounkova1, PhD; Eiko Oka1, MPH 1The University of Iowa, College of Nursing; 2The University of Iowa, College of Medicine; 3The University of Iowa, College of Public Health Aim of Investigation Methods Results Content Validity: strongly agreed on the importance and the relevance of each item. Pilot Test: A total of 164 students completed the Pain Knowledge Tool. Psychometric Evaluation: Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.49), test-retest stability (proportion of agreement = 84.5% for overall) Tool Development Knowledge Tool was developed to focus on 4 pain management domains and 21 core pain competencies identified by Fishman, et al., 2013. Content Validity Eight pain experts reviewed each question for content validity: Importance of the questions Relevance to their discipline Clarity of the questions Pilot Test The Tool was pilot tested with graduating students from 5 disciplines in the University of Iowa. College of Nursing College of Dentistry College of Pharmacy Department of Physical Therapy School of Social Work Psychometric Evaluation Problem: Inadequate treatment of pain Table 1 Summary of Content Validity Index (CVI) Importance Relevance Clarity Mean I-CVI 1.00 0.99 0.98 S-CVI/UA 0.95 0.81 Pain Management Domains (Fishman, et al., 2013) Multidimensional nature of pain: What is pain? Pain assessment and measurement: How is pain recognized? Management of pain: How is pain relieved? Clinical conditions: How does context influence pain management? One Reason: Lack of pain content in curricula across healthcare disciplines Table 2 Mean % correct Mean Std Dev All discipline 66.8 (n=164) 11.5 Nursing 65.1 (n=25) 10.1 Dentistry 58.0 (n=17) 10.5 Pharmacy 66.4 (n=73) 10.8 Physical Therapy 78.5 (n=27) 5.0 Social Work 62.3 (n=22) 11.7 Goal: To improve pain education for pre-licensure healthcare students How to improve pain education? Establish core pain competencies. Assess pain knowledge of students. Identify knowledge gaps and improve their pain education curricula. Conclusion The Pain Knowledge Tool demonstrated strong content validity in importance and relevance across disciplines. Preliminary testing established fair internal consistency and strong stability. Further tool refinement is underway. Accomplished! (Fishman, et al., 2013) established 21 core pain competencies. Acknowledgements To respond to this, the University of Iowa Center of Excellence in Pain Education (UI CoEPE) developed a Pain Knowledge Tool using the 21 core pain competencies. The authors wish to acknowledge Esther Bernhofer, PhD, RN-BC, from Cleveland Clinic and Maria Hein from the University of Iowa for their advice and development of the tool. This work was supported by a grant from National Institutes of Health Pain Consortium, Centers of Excellence in Pain Education (CoEPEs), NIDA contract #: HHSN C. Contact Information For more detail information, please contact Keela Herr,


Download ppt "Table 1 Summary of Content Validity Index (CVI)"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google