Abstract：
A new outcome measure for hand burn injuries was co-designed within a Participatory Action Research framework with expert clinicians and individuals with hand burn injuries. The outcome measure reviews activities which are commonly interrupted post hand burn injuries and includes 18 activities.
The aim of this study was to establish the clinical utility, face, and content validity of the newly developed outcome measure.
Three constructs of interest were examined using study specific questionnaires from the perspectives of clinicians and individuals with hand burn injuries. Clinicians working in burns centres around Australia and New Zealand and individuals attending a burn centre within one tertiary hospital trialled the outcome measure. Upon testing the outcome measure each participant completed the questionnaire.
Twenty individuals with hand burn injuries and eight clinicians trialled the outcome measure. There was 85% agreement from individuals and 100% agreement from clinicians for face validity. Content validity was tested across the domains of relevance and clarity. Individuals rated all activities and clinicians rated 16 activities as relevant. Clarity of activities was high for both participant groups (>75% agreement). Clinical utility (measured in the domains of appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability) was high, 95% of individuals reported agreement for practicability and 100% agreement for acceptability. Clinicians reported agreement of > 87.5% for appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability.
The results demonstrated agreement for clinical utility, face, and content validity of the co-design outcome measure for hand burn injuries. Further validity and reliability testing is planned, including Rasch analysis.
The aim of this study was to establish the clinical utility, face, and content validity of the newly developed outcome measure.
Three constructs of interest were examined using study specific questionnaires from the perspectives of clinicians and individuals with hand burn injuries. Clinicians working in burns centres around Australia and New Zealand and individuals attending a burn centre within one tertiary hospital trialled the outcome measure. Upon testing the outcome measure each participant completed the questionnaire.
Twenty individuals with hand burn injuries and eight clinicians trialled the outcome measure. There was 85% agreement from individuals and 100% agreement from clinicians for face validity. Content validity was tested across the domains of relevance and clarity. Individuals rated all activities and clinicians rated 16 activities as relevant. Clarity of activities was high for both participant groups (>75% agreement). Clinical utility (measured in the domains of appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability) was high, 95% of individuals reported agreement for practicability and 100% agreement for acceptability. Clinicians reported agreement of > 87.5% for appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability.
The results demonstrated agreement for clinical utility, face, and content validity of the co-design outcome measure for hand burn injuries. Further validity and reliability testing is planned, including Rasch analysis.
摘要：
背景：在参与式行动研究框架内，与专家临床医生和手部烧伤患者共同设计了一种针对手部烧伤的新结果测量。结果措施回顾了手部烧伤后通常中断的活动，包括18项活动。
目的：本研究的目的是建立临床效用，脸,和新开发的结果测量的内容有效性。
方法：使用特定研究问卷从临床医生和手部烧伤患者的角度检查了三种感兴趣的结构。在澳大利亚和新西兰的烧伤中心工作的临床医生以及在一家三级医院内的烧伤中心就诊的个人对结果进行了测试。在测试结果测量后，每个参与者都完成了问卷。
结果：20名手部烧伤患者和8名临床医生对结果测量进行了试验。对于面部有效性，个人同意85％，临床医生同意100％。内容有效性在相关性和清晰度领域进行了测试。个人对所有活动进行评级，临床医生对16项活动进行评级。两个参与者组的活动清晰度都很高(>75%同意)。临床效用(在适当性领域衡量，可访问性,实用性,和可接受性)很高，95％的个人报告同意实用性和100％同意可接受性。临床医生报告对适当性的一致性>87.5%，可访问性,实用性,和可接受性。
结论：结果证明了临床效用的一致性，脸,手烧伤联合设计结果测量的内容效度。计划进行进一步的有效性和可靠性测试，包括Rasch分析。
目的：本研究的目的是建立临床效用，脸,和新开发的结果测量的内容有效性。
方法：使用特定研究问卷从临床医生和手部烧伤患者的角度检查了三种感兴趣的结构。在澳大利亚和新西兰的烧伤中心工作的临床医生以及在一家三级医院内的烧伤中心就诊的个人对结果进行了测试。在测试结果测量后，每个参与者都完成了问卷。
结果：20名手部烧伤患者和8名临床医生对结果测量进行了试验。对于面部有效性，个人同意85％，临床医生同意100％。内容有效性在相关性和清晰度领域进行了测试。个人对所有活动进行评级，临床医生对16项活动进行评级。两个参与者组的活动清晰度都很高(>75%同意)。临床效用(在适当性领域衡量，可访问性,实用性,和可接受性)很高，95％的个人报告同意实用性和100％同意可接受性。临床医生报告对适当性的一致性>87.5%，可访问性,实用性,和可接受性。
结论：结果证明了临床效用的一致性，脸,手烧伤联合设计结果测量的内容效度。计划进行进一步的有效性和可靠性测试，包括Rasch分析。
