A new measure for multi-professional medical team communication: design and methodology for multilingual measurement development

BackgroundAs implementation science in global health continues to evolve, there is a need for valid and reliable measures that consider diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. A standardized, reproducible process for multilingual measure development may improve accessibility and validity by participants in global health settings. To address this need, we propose a rigorous methodology for multilingual measurement development. We use the example of a novel measure of multi-professional team communication quality, a determinant of implementation efforts.MethodsThe development and translation of this novel bilingual measure is comprised of seven steps. In this paper, we describe a measure developed in English and Spanish, however, this approach is not language specific. Participants are engaged throughout the process: first, an interprofessional panel of experts and second, through cognitive interviewing for measure refinement. The steps of measure development included: (1) literature review to identify previous measures of team communication; (2) development of an initial measure by the expert panel; (3) cognitive interviewing in a phased approach with the first language (English); (4): formal, forward-backward translation process with attention to colloquialisms and regional differences in languages; (5) cognitive interviewing repeated in the second language (Spanish); (6) language synthesis to refine both instruments and unify feedback; and (7) final review of the refined measure by the expert panel.ResultsA draft measure to assess quality of multi-professional team communication was developed in Spanish and English, consisting of 52 questions in 7 domains. This measure is now ready for psychometric testing.ConclusionsThis seven-step, rigorous process of multilingual measure development can be used in a variety of linguistic and resource settings. This method ensures development of valid and reliable tools to collect data from a wide range of participants, including those who have historically been excluded due to language barriers. Use of this method will increase both rigor and accessibility of measurement in implementation science and advance equity in research and practice

Development and pilot testing of PROACTIVE: A pediatric onco‐critical care capacity and quality assessment tool for resource‐limited settings

Abstract Background Nearly 90% children with cancer reside in low‐ and middle‐income countries, which face multiple challenges delivering high‐quality pediatric onco‐critical care (POCC). We recently identified POCC quality and capacity indicators for PROACTIVE (PediatRic Oncology cApaCity assessment Tool for IntensiVe carE), a tool that evaluates strengths and limitations in POCC services. This study describes pilot testing of PROACTIVE, development of center‐specific reports, and identification of common POCC challenges. Methods The original 119 consensus‐derived PROACTIVE indicators were converted into 182 questions divided between 2 electronic surveys for intensivists and oncologists managing critically ill pediatric cancer patients. Alpha‐testing was conducted to confirm face‐validity with four pediatric intensivists. Eleven centers representing diverse geographic regions, income levels, and POCC services conducted beta‐testing to evaluate usability, feasibility, and applicability of PROACTIVE. Centers' responses were scored and indicators with mean scores ≤75% in availability/performance were classified as common POCC challenges. Results Alpha‐testing ensured face‐validity and beta‐testing demonstrated feasibility and usability of PROACTIVE (October 2020–June 2021). Twenty‐two surveys (response rate 99.4%) were used to develop center‐specific reports. Adjustments to PROACTIVE were made based on focus group feedback and surveys, resulting in 200 questions. Aggregated data across centers identified common POCC challenges: (1) lack of pediatric intensivists, (2) absence of abstinence and withdrawal symptoms monitoring, (3) shortage of supportive care resources, and (4) limited POCC training for physicians and nurses. Conclusions PROACTIVE is a feasible and contextually appropriate tool to help clinicians and organizations identify challenges in POCC services across a wide range of resource‐levels. Widespread use of PROACTIVE can help prioritize and develop tailored interventions to strengthen POCC services and outcomes globally

Global PARITY: Study Design for a Multi-Centered, International Point Prevalence Study to Estimate the Burden of Pediatric Acute Critical Illness in Resource-Limited Settings

BackgroundThe burden of pediatric critical illness and resource utilization by children with critical illness in resource limited settings (RLS) are largely unknown. Without specific data that captures key aspects of critical illness, disease presentation, and resource utilization for pediatric populations in RLS, development of a contextual framework for appropriate, evidence-based interventions to guide allocation of limited but available resources is challenging. We present this methods paper which describes our efforts to determine the prevalence, etiology, hospital outcomes, and resource utilization associated with pediatric acute, critical illness in RLS globally.MethodsWe will conduct a prospective, observational, multicenter, multinational point prevalence study in sixty-one participating RLS hospitals from North, Central and South America, Africa, Middle East and South Asia with four sampling time points over a 12-month period. Children aged 29 days to 14 years evaluated for acute illness or injury in an emergency department) or directly admitted to an inpatient unit will be enrolled and followed for hospital outcomes and resource utilization for the first seven days of hospitalization. The primary outcome will be prevalence of acute critical illness, which Global PARITY has defined as death within 48 hours of presentation to the hospital, including ED mortality; or admission/transfer to an HDU or ICU; or transfer to another institution for a higher level-of-care; or receiving critical care-level interventions (vasopressor infusion, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation) regardless of location in the hospital, among children presenting to the hospital. Secondary outcomes include etiology of critical illness, in-hospital mortality, cause of death, resource utilization, length of hospital stay, and change in neurocognitive status. Data will be managed via REDCap, aggregated, and analyzed across sites.DiscussionThis study is expected to address the current gap in understanding of the burden, etiology, resource utilization and outcomes associated with pediatric acute and critical illness in RLS. These data are crucial to inform future research and clinical management decisions and to improve global pediatric hospital outcomes

DataSheet_1_CritCom: assessment of quality of interdisciplinary communication around deterioration in pediatric oncologic patients.docx

BackgroundHigh-quality clinical care requires excellent interdisciplinary communication, especially during emergencies, and no tools exist to evaluate communication in critical care. We describe the development of a pragmatic tool focusing on interdisciplinary communication during patient deterioration (CritCom).MethodsThe preliminary CritCom tool was developed after a literature review and consultation with a multidisciplinary panel of global experts in communication, pediatric oncology, and critical care to review the domains and establish content validity iteratively. Face and linguistic validity were established through cognitive interviews, translation, and linguistic synthesis. We conducted a pilot study among an international group of clinicians to establish reliability and usability.ResultsAfter reviewing 105 potential survey items, we identified 52 items across seven domains. These were refined through cognitive interviews with 36 clinicians from 15 countries. CritCom was piloted with 433 clinicians (58% nurses, 36% physicians, and 6% other) from 42 hospitals in 22 countries. Psychometric testing guided the refinement of the items for the final tool. CritCom comprised six domains with five items each (30 total). The final tool has excellent reliability (Cronbach’s alpha 0.81-0.86), usability (93% agree or strongly agree that the tool is easy to use), and similar performance between English and Spanish tools. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to establish the final 6-domain structure.ConclusionsCritCom is a reliable and pragmatic bilingual tool to assess the quality of interdisciplinary communication around patient deterioration for children in diverse resource levels globally. Critcom results can be used to design and evaluate interventions to improve team communication.</p