4.1 Article

Dementia Knowledge Assessment Tool Version Two: Development of a tool to inform preparation for care planning and delivery in families and care staff

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1471301212471960

关键词

dementia; health knowledge; health services for the aged; questionnaires; reliability and validity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Care for the person with dementia requires understanding of the person's perspective and preferences, integrated with knowledge of dementia's trajectory and appropriate care. Version One of the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Tool addressed such knowledge in care workers; Version Two is for families as well as staff. Content validity was established during development. Revisions addressed clarity, time for completion, and reliability. When 671 staff completed Version One before an education intervention, internal consistency reliability estimates exceeded 0.70. Validity was supported by higher scores in professional versus nonprofessional staff and following the education. Version Two was used with 34 family carers and 70 staff members. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient) was promising (0.79, both groups). Completion was within 15 minutes. Median correct responses (from 21) were 14 for families (range 4-20) and 16 for the staff (range 3-21). Eighteen staff members (26%) and two family carers (6%) reported substantive dementia education. Inclusion of the person with dementia in care planning is often limited because of a late diagnosis and the progressive impacts of the condition. Establishing a shared staff-family understanding of the dementia trajectory and care strategies likely to be helpful is therefore critical to embarking upon the development and implementation of collaborative long term and end-of-life care plans. Version Two can help establish needs for, and outcomes of, education programs and informational resources in a way that is feasible, minimises burden, and facilitates comparisons across family and staff carer groups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据