The purpose of this study was to assess reliability and validity of the Revised Easley-Storfjell Patient Classification Instrument (R-ESPCI). Content validity was assessed by expert home health nurses. Interrater reliability was assessed by staff nurse ratings of patients on home visits (N = 34) and by chart review by the investigators (N = 30). Concurrent validity was also assessed. Percentage agreement for staff nurses was 36% (kappa = -.15) and 52% (kappa = .04) in two phases and for investigators 90% (kappa = .63) and 50% (kappa = .02) in two phases. Minimal support for concurrent validity was found. Content validity was established, but revised reimbursement policy eliminated less acutely ill patients, narrowing the acuity range. More discrete rating criteria or scoring changes may be needed, followed by further assessment of the R-ESPCI. Agency stability and adequate resources for staff training are required for additional testing of the instrument.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albrecht, M. N. (1991). Home health care: Reliability and validity testing of a patient-classification instrument. Public Health Nursing, 8, 124-131.
2.
Algera-Osinga, J. T. , Halfens, R., Hasman, A., & Wiersma, D. (1994). A Dutch patient classification system for community care. Journal of Nursing Administration, 24(7-8), 32-38.
3.
Allen, C. E. , Easley, C. E., & Storfjell, J. I. (1986). Cost management through caseload/workload analysis. In F. A. Shaffer (Ed.), Patients and purse strings: Patient classification and cost management (pp. 331-346). New York: National League for Nursing.
4.
Ballard, S. , & McNamara, R. (1983). Quantifying nursing needs in home health care. Nursing Research, 32, 236-241.
5.
Brennan, P. F. , & Hays, B. J. (1992). The kappa statistic for establishing interrater reliability in the secondary analysis of qualitative clinical data. Research in Nursing & Health, 15, 153-158.
6.
Churness, V. H. , Kleffel, D., & Onodera, M. L. (1991). Home health patient classification system. Home Healthcare Nurse, 9(2), 14-22.
7.
Churness, V. H. , Kleffel, D., Onodera, M. L., & Jacobson, J. (1988). Reliability and validity testing of a home health patient classification system. Public Health Nursing, 5, 135-139.
8.
Cloonan, P. A. , & Belyea, M. J. (1993). Limits of using patient characteristics in predicting home health care coordination. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 15, 742-751.
9.
Daubert, E. A. (1979). Patient classification system and outcome criteria. Nursing Outlook, 27, 450-454.
10.
Giovannetti, P. (1979). Understanding patient classification systems. Journal of Nursing Administration, 9(2), 4-7.
11.
Hays, B. J. (1992). Nursing care requirements and resource consumption in home health care. Nursing Research, 41, 138-143.
12.
Hays, B. J. (1995). Nursing intensity as a predictor of resource consumption in public health nursing. Nursing Research, 44, 106-110.
13.
Helberg, J. L. (1989). Reliability of the nursing classification index for home healthcare. Nursing Management, 20(3), 48-56.
14.
Helberg, J. L. (1994). Use of home care nursing resources by the elderly. Public Health Nursing, 11, 104-112.
15.
Imle, M. A. , & Atwood, J. R. (1988). Retaining qualitative validity while gaining quantitative reliability and validity: Development of the transition to parenthood concerns scale. Advances in Nursing Science, 11, 61-75.
16.
Landis, J. R. , & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.
17.
Madigan, E. A. , & Anderson, M. A. (1999). Service delivery challenges of nursing research in home health care. Research in Nursing & Health, 22, 349-353.
18.
Medicare and Medicaid Programs. (1999). Reporting outcome and assessment information set (OASIS) data as part of the conditions of participation for home health agencies and comprehensive assessment and use of the OASIS as part of the conditions of participation for home health agencies, Fed. Reg. (to be codified at 42 C.F.R. Parts 484 and 488).
19.
Medicare Program. (2000). Prospective payment system for home health agencies; Final Rule, Fed. Reg. (to be codified at 42 C.F.R. Parts 409, 410, 411, 413, 424, and 484).
20.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
21.
Outcome-based quality improvement and the OASIS data set . (1997). Home Healthcare Nurse, 15, 203-206.
22.
Peters, D. A. (1988). Development of a community health intensity rating scale. Nursing Research, 37, 202-207.
23.
Ryan, J. W. , Phillips, C. Y., & Prescott, P. A. (1988). Interrater reliability: The underdeveloped role of rater training. Applied Nursing Research, 1, 148-150.
24.
Saba, V. K. , O’Hare, P. A., Zuckerman, A. E., Boondas, J., Levine, E., & Oatway, D. M. (1991). A nursing intervention taxonomy for home health care. Nursing and Health Care, 12, 296-299.
25.
Saba, V. K. , & Zuckerman, A. E. (1992). A new home health classification method. Caring, 11(10), 27-34.
26.
Stafford, D. M. , Scemons, D., & Jones, J. (1997). Case management through productivity engineering: Part 1: Development of the intensity of home care acuity scale. Home Health Care Management and Practice, 9(4), 1-5.
27.
Trisolini, M. G. , Thomas, C. P., Cashman, S. B., & Payne, S.M.C. (1994). Resource utilization in home health care: Results of a prospective study. Home Health Care Services Quarterly, 15, 19-41.
28.
Washington, C. C. , & Moss, M. (1988). Pragmatic aspects of establishing interrater reliability in research. Nursing Research, 37, 190-191.
