Involving volunteer visitors in data collection
description
Transcript of Involving volunteer visitors in data collection
Involving volunteer visitors in data collection
National Centre for Training and Education in Prosthetics and OrthoticsUniversity of Strathclyde
GlasgowScotland
Brian Callaghan
Callaghan BG, Condie ME (2003). A post-discharge quality of life outcome measure for lower limb amputees: test-retest reliability and construct validity. Clinical Rehabilitation 17, 858-865.
Quality of life assessment in lower limb amputees (Callaghan and Condie, 2003)
1. Adapt the Patient Generated Index (PGI) for Amputees
2. Test-Retest Reliability and Construct Validity Study
Aims of Project
• Participants (N = 39)
– Inclusion Criteria• Over 16-years of Age• Unilateral /Transfemoral Amputation• Fitted with a Prosthesis• Discharged 1-Year
– Patient Selection• SPARG Database• 7 Participating Rehabilitation Centres
Method
Your answers to the following steps will tell us how your life is affected by your AMPUTATION AND ITS TREATMENT. It will also tell us how you would like to see your life improved.
In this part, you score the areas that you have mentioned in Step 1. This score should show how badly affected you were over the past MONTH in that area. Please score each area out of 10 using this scale: 10 = Exactly as you would like to be 9 = Close to how you would like to be 8 = Very good but not how you would like to be 7 = Good, but not how you would like 6 = Between good and fair 5 = Fair 4 = Between poor and fair 3 = Poor but not the worst you could imagine 2 = Very poor but not the worst you could imagine 1 = Close to the worst you could imagine 0 = The worst you could imagine
Think of the most important areas of your life that are affected by your AMPUTATION AND ITS TREATMENT. Please write up to FIVE areas in the FIVE boxes below.
ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF YOUR LIFE NOT MENTIONED ABOVE
Please use this last box to score all areas affected by other health problems and/or all other non-health problems.
Now think of the most important areas to you. You have 12 imaginary points to spend to show which areas you feel are the most important to you. Spend more points on those areas that you feel are more important to you and less on the areas that you feel are less important to you. You do not have to spend points in every area if you don’t want. That is, you can leave boxes blank if they are not important to you at all. Also, you can not spend more than 12 points in total.
Remember total must add up to 12
Groups
• Procedure
– Murray Foundation Visitors (N = 10)
• 1st Visit (at home)–PGI and SF-12
• 2nd Visit (at home 1-month later)–PGI Only
Method
• Procedure
– Murray Foundation Visitors (N = 10)
• Before Study–Training day
• After Study–Debriefing day
Method
–Murray Foundation Visitors (N = 9)
Eight open-ended questions (given independently) to elicit experiences of MF visitors.
Responses (with frequencies)
Debriefing Day
Question.Do you feel that the training you received at The National Centre was sufficient to enable you to carry out your interviews?
Answer. yes (x9)
Question.What do you feel are the most important skills for carrying out interviews with fellow amputees?
Answers.empathy (x2)patience (x1)listening (x5)guiding [pts] to understand questions (x1)
Question.Do you think that the participants you interviewed gave more information to you than they would have to me [Brian]?
Answer.yes (x9)
Question.What sorts of things do you think the participants talked to you about that they might have felt uncomfortable talking to me about?
Answers.NHS staff (x1)personal issues (x1)comfort/pain (x1)partners feelings (x1)hygiene (x1)sex (x1)toilet issues (x1)anxiety (x1)day to day activities (x1)
Question.What do you think makes for a good interview?
Answers.relaxed atmosphere (x3)willing participant (x1)one-to-one (x1)pt in good condition/no pain (x1)pt understands what's required (x1)pts home (x1)pt comfortable/not intimidated (x1)
Question.What do you think makes for a bad interview?
Answers.hurried (x1)no empathy (x2)over prompting (x1)other family present (x1)complicated questions (x1)pressure to say right thing (pt feels) (x1)tension (x1)interviewer uncomfortable (x1)“chip-on-shoulder amputee”?!
Question.Are there any questions, or types of questions, that you would feel uncomfortable asking a participant?
Answers.no (x3)sex/personal (x4)standard of living (x1)smoking/drinking (x1)
Question.If you signed a declaration of confidentiality, but then a participant revealed to you during an interview that they might harm themselves in some way, would you tell me or anyone else?
Answers.yes (x4)possibly (x3)no (x2)
Callaghan BG, Johnston M, Condie ME (2001-2004). Predictors of prosthetic fitting, use and recovery following lower limb amputation: illness related cognitions, attitudes towards prosthetic use, psychological distress and functional limitations. (funded by Chief Scientist Office (CSO), Scottish Health Executive)
Psychosocial predictors of prosthetic use and recovery (Callaghan, Johnston, Condie, 2001-2004)
• Participants (N = 170)
• A 12-month Cohort of New Unilateral Lower Limb Amputees (transtibial and transfemoral)
– Additional Inclusion Criteria• Over 50-years of Age• Fluent in English• Pass Cognitive Screening Test• PVD (Peripheral Vascular Disease)• 8 Participating Rehabilitation Centres
MethodParticipants
– Questionnaire Development• TPB (Attitudes Towards Prosthetic Use)
– Assessment Times • 3-4 weeks post-operative• 1-month post-discharge from rehabilitation• 6-months post-discharge from rehabilitation
– Data Collection• Principle Researcher• Senior Physiotherapist• Murray Foundation Volunteers
MethodProcedure
Training Day
– Murray Foundation Visitors (N = 18)
Research Methods in Healthcare (Revisited)
Outline
1. The New Study
IntroductionAims and purposesResearch questionsMethodsProceduresImplications
How results could benefit lower limb amputees in Scotland
Discussion Talking about the study with visiting volunteers
Questions and answers
2. The Measures To Be Used
Introduction to the measuresGuidelines for use
Instruction booklets will again be provided
LCIRLOCHADSFMA (questions 3, 4, 6 and 11)PGI (revisited)
3. Interview Technique (revisited)
Understanding ethical conductUnderstanding confidentialityUnderstanding objectivityUnderstanding impartialityInterview demonstration
by Research Fellow
Practice interviewing techniques Visiting Volunteers
4. Administrative Procedure
Understanding materials the interview package (e.g.,questionnaire, guidelines for
use, return stamped addressed envelope, etc.)
Understanding procedure (e.g., returning questionnaires, contacting Research
Fellow, etc)
How visits are arranged by Research Fellow
How visits are allocated to a volunteer visitor
Being in contacting with Research Fellow at all times!
Interim Feedback Day
– Murray Foundation Visitors (N = 8)
Matters ArisingDifficult intervieweesLost follow-ups
Participants encouraged by seeing visitor!
Theory of Planned Behaviour
Normative Beliefs Intention
Control Beliefs
Behavioural Beliefs
Subjective Norm
Perceived Behavioural
Control
Attitude Toward the Behaviour
Behaviour
Ajzen I (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Decision Process 50, 179-211.
Social Cognition Models
Theory of Planned Behaviour
Normative Beliefs
I will intend to do this
behaviour?
Subjective Norm BehaviourIf I want to comply with the perceived approval of other people/groups I value?
If I value the expected outcomes as being beneficial to me?
If I believe I have the skills and resources required to overcome likely obstacles?
Ajzen I (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Decision Process 50, 179-211.
Theory of Planned Behaviour
Normative Beliefs
I will intend to do a behaviour?
Subjective Norm Behaviour(Prosthetic Use)
I would like to impress my peers the way this visitor has impressed me?
I would like to be as mobile and independent as this visitor?
I have a prosthesis too and if this visitor can do it then so can I?
Ajzen I (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Decision Process 50, 179-211.
Self-efficacy
Bandura A (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to organise and execute the courses of action required to produce given levels of attainment or manage prospective situations (Bandura, 1986).
Self-efficacy (in Social Cognitive Model)
Self-efficacy Proximal Goals
Impediments
Outcome Expectations
Behaviour
Bandura A (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behaviour And Human Decision Processes 50, 248-287.
Social Cognition Models
Enhancing Self-efficacy
Vicarious Modeling
Somatic /Mood States
Social Persuasion
Mastery Experiences
Self-efficacy
Bandura A (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Interpret information from..
..watching others perform the behaviour
..biological and emotional feedback
..being persuaded you can do the behaviour
..practicing the behaviour
Self-efficacy
Bandura A (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Enhancing Self-efficacy
Interpret information from..
..biological and emotional feedback
..practicing the behaviour
Self-efficacy
Bandura A (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Enhancing Self-efficacy
..being encouraged by fellow amputees’ verbal support
..watching fellow amputees adapting and coping well