title: The Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool: a valid and reliable instrument for measuring care process organization of health care teams.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Patient safety can be increased by improving the organization of care. A tool that evaluates the actual organization of care, as perceived by multidisciplinary teams, is the Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool (CPSET). CPSET was developed in 2007 and includes 29 items in five subscales: (a) patient-focused organization, (b) coordination of the care process, (c) collaboration with primary care, (d) communication with patients and family, and (e) follow-up of the care process. The goal of the present study was to further evaluate the psychometric properties of the CPSET at the team and hospital levels and to compile a cutoff score table.
  
  
  METHODS
  The psychometric properties of the CPSET were assessed in a multicenter study in Belgium and the Netherlands. In total, 3139 team members from 114 hospitals participated. Psychometric properties were evaluated by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach's alpha, interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Kruskall-Wallis test, and Mann-Whitney test. For the cutoff score table, percentiles were used. Demographic variables were also evaluated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  CFA showed a good model fit: a normed fit index of 0.93, a comparative fit index of 0.94, an adjusted goodness-of-fit index of 0.87, and a root mean square error of approximation of 0.06. Cronbach's alpha values were between 0.869 and 0.950. The team-level ICCs varied between 0.127 and 0.232 and were higher than those at the hospital level (0.071-0.151). Male team members scored significantly higher than females on 2 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. There were also significant differences among age groups. Medical doctors scored significantly higher on 4 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. Coordinators of care processes scored significantly lower on 2 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. Cutoff scores for all subscales and the overall CPSET were calculated.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The CPSET is a valid and reliable instrument for health care teams to measure the extent care processes are organized. The cutoff table permits teams to compare how they perceive the organization of their care process relative to other teams.
authors: Department of Public Health, Center for Health Services and Nursing Research, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35 4th Floor, Leuven B-3000, Belgium.
authors: Deborah
authors: D
authors: Seys
authors: Svin
authors: S
authors: Deneckere
authors: Walter
authors: W
authors: Sermeus
authors: Eva
authors: E
authors: Van Gerven
authors: Massimiliano
authors: M
authors: Panella
authors: Luk
authors: L
authors: Bruyneel
authors: Timothy
authors: T
authors: Mutsvari
authors: Rafaela Camacho
authors: RC
authors: Bejarano
authors: Seval
authors: S
authors: Kul
authors: Kris
authors: K
authors: Vanhaecht
mesh_terms: D001530:Belgium; D003266:Continuity of Patient Care; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration*; D005163:Factor Analysis, Statistical; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009426:Netherlands; D010348:Patient Care Team; D061214:Patient Safety; D018802:Patient-Centered Care; D017064:Process Assessment, Health Care; D011368:Professional-Family Relations; D011594:Psychometrics; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires / Q000592:standards*
references: Med Care Rev. 1994 Fall;51(3):289-335
references: 10138050
references: JAMA. 2007 Mar 14;297(10):1103-11
references: 17356031
references: Soc Sci Med. 2012 Jul;75(2):264-8
references: 22560883
references: BMJ. 2009 May 14;338:b1775
references: 19443552
references: Am J Crit Care. 2012 Mar;21(2):e41-52
references: 22381995
references: Implement Sci. 2012 May 18;7:47
references: 22607698
references: BMJ. 2012 Mar 20;344:e1717
references: 22434089
references: Am J Med Qual. 2011 Nov-Dec;26(6):480-4
references: 21813506
references: Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):581-9
references: 21471476
references: N Engl J Med. 2010 Nov 25;363(22):2124-34
references: 21105794
references: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009 Feb;53(2):143-51
references: 19032571
references: N Engl J Med. 2004 Nov 11;351(20):2041-3
references: 15537902
references: J Hosp Med. 2012 Jan;7(1):48-54
references: 22042511
references: Crit Care Med. 2003 Mar;31(3):956-9
references: 12627011
references: Health Serv Manage Res. 2007 Aug;20(3):189-202
references: 17683658
references: Int J Qual Health Care. 2011 Apr;23(2):159-66
references: 21242160
references: J Nurs Manag. 2010 Nov;18(8):926-37
references: 21073566
references: Scand J Caring Sci. 2012 Dec;26(4):698-704
references: 22420418
references: J Eval Clin Pract. 2013 Feb;19(1):11-5
references: 21883717
references: Int J Nurs Stud. 2008 Mar;45(3):382-92
references: 17140580
references: Hip Int. 2011 Nov-Dec;21(6):770-1
references: 22117259
references: Eval Health Prof. 2011 Sep;34(3):258-77
references: 21190951