Article type
Abstract
Background: Commonly a qualitative exploratory study serves as the foundation for quantitative instrument development. This was the case in the 1979 development of Molter’s Critical Care Family Needs Inventory (CCFNI) that became the benchmark instrument for measuring family needs associated with critical are hospitalisation of a loved one.
Objective: This session will describe a process whereby the results of a qualitative systematic review on family needs of adult critical care patients was used to evaluate the relevance and the validity of the CCNFI.
Method: Mixed-method systematic review.
Results: The results of the qualitative systematic review included 410 findings extracted from 42 articles that were critically appraised to be of adequate rigour. These findings were then collapsed into 23 categories and synthesised into 3 meta-aggregative statements providing lines of action for meeting family needs. This meta-synthesis provided a conceptualisation of the phenomenon of family needs and specific behaviours, interests, desires and expectations that underlie the construct. A secondary data analysis was undertaken to compare the findings and categories to the items, subscales, and factor analysis components of Molter’s CCFNI using the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 studies. Using a theoretical content analysis approach the researchers went back and forth between the qualitative lens to a quantitative lens and vice versa until maximal meaning and fit had been achieved.
Conclusion: Although there were some constants across the data (i.e. the need for information and close proximity), qualitative meta-synthesis suggests that the tool may not be as relevant today and that updating of the tool is called for to achieve maximum utility.
Objective: This session will describe a process whereby the results of a qualitative systematic review on family needs of adult critical care patients was used to evaluate the relevance and the validity of the CCNFI.
Method: Mixed-method systematic review.
Results: The results of the qualitative systematic review included 410 findings extracted from 42 articles that were critically appraised to be of adequate rigour. These findings were then collapsed into 23 categories and synthesised into 3 meta-aggregative statements providing lines of action for meeting family needs. This meta-synthesis provided a conceptualisation of the phenomenon of family needs and specific behaviours, interests, desires and expectations that underlie the construct. A secondary data analysis was undertaken to compare the findings and categories to the items, subscales, and factor analysis components of Molter’s CCFNI using the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 studies. Using a theoretical content analysis approach the researchers went back and forth between the qualitative lens to a quantitative lens and vice versa until maximal meaning and fit had been achieved.
Conclusion: Although there were some constants across the data (i.e. the need for information and close proximity), qualitative meta-synthesis suggests that the tool may not be as relevant today and that updating of the tool is called for to achieve maximum utility.