Reliability and Validity of the Pediatric Palliative Care Questionnaire for Measuring Self-Efficacy, Knowledge, and Adequacy of Prior Medical Education among Pediatric Fellows

Abstract

Background: Interventions to improve pediatric trainee education in palliative care have been limited by a lack of reliable and valid tools for measuring effectiveness. Objective: We developed a questionnaire to measure pediatric fellows' self-efficacy (comfort), knowledge, and perceived adequacy of prior medical education. We measured the questionnaire's reliability and validity. Methods: The questionnaire contains questions regarding self-efficacy (23), knowledge (10), fellow's perceived adequacy of prior medical education (6), and demographics. The survey was developed with palliative care experts, and sent to fellows in U.S. pediatric cardiology, critical care, hematology/ oncology, and neonatalperinatal medicine programs. Measures of reliability, internal consistency, and validity were calculated. Results: One hundred forty-seven fellows completed the survey at test and retest. The self-efficacy and medical education questionnaires showed high internal consistency of 0.95 and 0.84. The test-retest reliability for the Self-Efficacy Summary Score, measured by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and weighted kappa, was 0.78 (item range 0.44-0.81) and 0.61 (item range 0.36-0.70), respectively. For the Adequacy of Medical Education Summary Score, ICC was 0.85 (item range 0.6-0.78) and weighted kappa was 0.63 (item range 0.47-0.62). Validity coefficients for these two questionnaires were 0.88 and 0.92. Fellows answered a mean of 8.8/10 knowledge questions correctly; percentage agreement ranged from 65% to 99%. Conclusions: This questionnaire is capable of assessing self-efficacy and fellow-perceived adequacy of their prior palliative care training. We recommend use of this tool for fellowship programs seeking to evaluate fellow education in palliative care, or for research studies assessing the effectiveness of a palliative care educational intervention.

Training Pediatric Fellows in Palliative Care: A Pilot Comparison of Simulation Training and Didactic Education

“…Both groups completed self-assessments using the Pediatric Palliative Care Questionnaire (PPCQ) at baseline and day 90 (intervention group mean 90 days [standard deviation, SD 14 days], control group mean 101 days [SD 14 days]). 55 Intervention group fellows also completed the PPCQ after day one (Fig. 2).…”

“…The PPCQ has good test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and validity with subscales measuring: Self-Efficacy (comfort) with pediatric PC and communication, perceived adequacy of prior medical education in PC and symptom management, PC knowledge, and barriers to PC. 55 Self-efficacy questions were scored from 1 to 5 with five being the most comfortable (summary score range 23-115). 55 Adequacy of prior medical education questions were scored from 1 to 5 with five indicating more adequate training (summary score range 6-30).…”

“…55 Self-efficacy questions were scored from 1 to 5 with five being the most comfortable (summary score range 23-115). 55 Adequacy of prior medical education questions were scored from 1 to 5 with five indicating more adequate training (summary score range 6-30). 55 Knowledge questions included seven multiple-choice and three true-false questions (score range 0-10).…”

Establishment of consensus on content and learning objectives for an interprofessional education in childhood cancer: a Delphi survey

“…The continuing professional development of medical doctors in childhood cancer is well documented, as demonstrated by well-structured fellowship and residency programmes that have been professionally evaluated. [2][3][4][5][6][7] Continuing professional development of other groups, such as nurses and psychologists in childhood cancer, is less documented. [8][9][10] Despite working alongside each other daily, healthcare professionals in childhood cancer are not formally trained What is known about the subject ► Well-structured and evaluated, interprofessional education in childhood cancer is lacking, as is consensus on the content and learning objectives of interprofessional education.…”

“…In the first round, we asked open-ended questions and used directed content analysis to analyse 386 statements. We formulated 170 interprofessional learning objectives in six categories: (1) acute life-threatening situations, (2) gastrointestinal toxicities and side effects, (3) pain, (4) palliation, (5) play and activity, and (6) prescription and administration of medicine. The second round resulted in 168 interprofessional learning objectives receiving a mean score of ≥3 on a five-point scale.…”