Searchable Title

Development and Evaluation of a Five-Language Multi-Perspective Standardised Measure: Clinical Decision-Making Involvement and Satisfaction (CDIS). Copyright: Creative Commons License.

Reference Type

Journal Article

Authors, Section

Slade, M.; Jordan, H.; Clarke, E.; Williams, P.; Kaliniecka, H.; Arnold, K.; Fiorillo, A.; Giacco, D.; Luciano, M.; Egerhazi, A.; Nagy, M.; Bording, M. K.; Sorensen, H. O.; Rossler, W.; Kawohl, W.; Puschner, B.; CEDAR Study Group

Title, Section

Development and Evaluation of a Five-Language Multi-Perspective Standardised Measure: Clinical Decision-Making Involvement and Satisfaction (CDIS). Copyright: Creative Commons License.

Publication Year

2014

Journal Title

BMC Health Services Research

Volume

14

Issue

July 28

Pages

323

Availability

online

PMID

PMID: 25066212

DOI

10.1186/1472-6963-14-323

Abstract

Full text tests are at: http://www.cedar-net.eu/instruments ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a brief quantitative five-language measure of involvement and satisfaction in clinical decision-making (CDIS) - with versions for patients (CDIS-P) and staff (CDIS-S) - for use in mental health services. METHODS: An English CDIS was developed by reviewing existing measures, focus groups, semistructured interviews and piloting. Translations into Danish, German, Hungarian and Italian followed the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Task Force principles of good practice for translation and cultural adaptation. Psychometricevaluation involved testing the measure in secondary mental health services in Aalborg, Debrecen, London, Naples, Ulm and Zurich. RESULTS: After appraising 14 measures, the Control Preference Scale and Satisfaction With Decision-making English-language scales were modified and evaluated in interviews (n = 9), focus groups (n = 22) and piloting (n = 16). Translations were validated through focus groups (n = 38) and piloting (n = 61). A total of 443 service users and 403 paired staff completed CDIS. The Satisfaction sub-scale had internal consistency of 0.89 (0.86-0.89 after item-level deletion) for staff and 0.90 (0.87-0.90) for service users, both continuous and categorical (utility) versions were associated with symptomatology and both staff-rated and service userrated therapeutic alliance (showing convergent validity), and not with social disability (showing divergent validity), and satisfaction predicted staff-rated (OR 2.43, 95%CI 1.54- 3.83 continuous, OR 5.77, 95%CI 1.90-17.53 utility) and service user-rated (OR 2.21, 95%CI 1.51-3.23 continuous, OR 3.13, 95%CI 1.10-8.94 utility) decision implementation two months later. The Involvement sub-scale had appropriate distribution and no floor or ceiling effects, was associated with stage of recovery, functioning and quality of life (staff only) (showing convergent validity), and not with symptomatology or social disability (showing divergent validity), and staff-rated passive involvement by the service user predicted implementation (OR 3.55, 95%CI 1.53-8.24). Relationships remained after adjusting for clustering by staff. CONCLUSIONS: CDIS demonstrates adequate internal consistency, no evidence of item redundancy, appropriate distribution, and face, content, convergent, divergent and predictive validity. It can be recommended for research and clinical use. CDIS-P and CDIS-S in all 3 five languages can be downloaded at http://www.cedar-net.eu/instruments.

Share

COinS