EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy Process Survey

Wiebke Mohr, Anika Rädke, Adel Afi, Franka Mühlichen, Moritz Platen, Annelie Scharf, Bernhard Michalowsky and Wolfgang Hoffmann
Additional contact information
Wiebke Mohr: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Anika Rädke: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Adel Afi: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Franka Mühlichen: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Moritz Platen: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Annelie Scharf: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Bernhard Michalowsky: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany
Wolfgang Hoffmann: German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstrasse 1-2, D-17487 Greifswald, Germany

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 14, 1-21

Abstract: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one approach to quantify , weigh and rank patient preferences suitable for People living with Dementia (PlwD), due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision problem. The objective of the present study was to design and pretest a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Methods: Two expert panels consisting of n = 4 Dementia Care Managers and n = 4 physicians to ensure content-validity, and “thinking-aloud” interviews with n = 11 PlwD and n = 3 family caregivers to ensure the face validity of the AHP survey. Following a semi-structured interview guide, PlwD were asked to assess appropriateness and comprehensibility. Data, field notes and partial interview transcripts were analyzed with a constant comparative approach, and feedback was incorporated continuously until PlwD had no further comments or struggles with survey completion. Consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated with Microsoft ® Excel and ExpertChoice Comparion ® . Results: Three main categories with sub-categories emerged: (1) Content: clear task introduction, (sub)criteria description, criteria homogeneity, (sub)criteria appropriateness, retest questions and sociodemography for heterogeneity; (2) Format: survey structure, pairwise comparison sequence, survey length, graphical design (incl. AHP scale), survey procedure explanation, survey assistance and response perspective; and (3) Layout: easy wording, short sentences and visual aids. Individual CRs ranged from 0.08 to 0.859, and the consolidated CR was 0.37 (0.038). Conclusions: Our formative qualitative study provides initial data for the design of a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Consideration of our findings may contribute to face and content validity in future quantitative preference research in dementia.

Keywords: patient preferences; dementia; participatory research; survey; shared decision making; multi-criteria decision analysis; analytic hierarchy process; person-centered care (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8554/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8554/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8554-:d:861836

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8554-:d:861836