Premium
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Pain Care Quality Surveys (Pain CQ © )
Author(s) -
Pett Marjorie A.,
Beck Susan L.,
Guo JiaWen,
Towsley Gail L.,
Brant Jeannine M.,
Lavoie Smith Ellen M.,
Berry Patricia H.,
Donaldson Gary W.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
health services research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.706
H-Index - 121
eISSN - 1475-6773
pISSN - 0017-9124
DOI - 10.1111/1475-6773.12014
Subject(s) - confirmatory factor analysis , cronbach's alpha , medicine , reliability (semiconductor) , structural equation modeling , family medicine , psychometrics , physical therapy , clinical psychology , statistics , power (physics) , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics
Objective To examine the reliability and validity and to decrease the battery of items in the P ain C are Q uality (Pain CQ © ) Surveys. Data Sources/Study Setting Patient‐reported data were collected prospectively from 337 hospitalized adult patients with pain on medical/surgical oncology units in four hospitals in three states. Study Design This methodological study used a cross‐sectional survey design. Each consenting patient completed two Pain CQ © Surveys, the B rief P ain I nventory‐ S hort F orm, and demographic questions. Clinical data were extracted from the medical record. Data Collection/Extraction Methods All data were double entered into a M icrosoft A ccess database, cleaned, and then extracted into SPSS , AMOS , and M plus for analysis. Principal Findings Confirmatory factor analysis using S tructural E quation M odeling supported the initial factor structure. Modification indices guided decisions that resulted in a superior, parsimonious model for the Pain CQ ‐Interdisciplinary Care Survey (six items, two subscales) and the Pain CQ ‐Nursing Care Survey (14 items, three subscales). Cronbach's alpha coefficients all exceeded .80. Conclusions Cumulative evidence supports the reliability and validity of the companion Pain CQ © Surveys in hospitalized patients with pain in the oncology setting. The tools may be relevant in both clinical research and quality improvement. Future research is recommended in other populations, settings, and with more diverse groups.