Are the content and usability of a new direct observation tool adequate for assessing competency in delivering person-centred care: a think-aloud study with patients and healthcare professionals in Sweden

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the content and usability of a new direct observation tool for assessing competency in delivering person-centred care based on the Gothenburg Centre for Person-Centred Care (gPCC) framework.Design This is a qualitative study using think-aloud techniques and retrospective probing interviews and analyzed using deductive content analysis.Setting Sessions were conducted remotely via Zoom with participants in their homes or offices.Participants 11 participants with lengthy experience of receiving, delivering and/or implementing gPCC were recruited using purposeful sampling and selected to represent a broad variety of stakeholders and potential end-users.Results Participants generally considered the content of the four main domains of the tool, that is, person-centred care activities, clinician manner, clinician skills and person-centred care goals, to be comprehensive and relevant for assessing person-centred care in general and gPCC in particular. Some participants pointed to the need to expand person-centred care activities to better reflect the emphasis on eliciting patient resources/capabilities and psychosocial needs in the gPCC framework. Think-aloud analyses revealed some usability issues primarily regarding difficulties or uncertainties in understanding several words and in using the rating scale. Probing interviews indicated that these problems could be mitigated by improving written instructions regarding response options and by replacing some words. Participants generally were satisfied with the layout and structure of the tool, but some suggested enlarging font size and text spacing to improve readability.Conclusion The tool appears to satisfactorily cover major person-centred care activities outlined in the gPCC framework. The inclusion of content concerning clinician manner and skills was seen as a relevant embellishment of the framework and as contributing to a more comprehensive assessment of clinician performance in the delivery of person-centred care. A revised version addressing observed content and usability issues will be tested for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and for feasibility of use in healthcare education and quality improvement efforts.