Development and Validation of Quality Criteria for Providing Patient- and Family-centered Injury Care

Jamie M. Boyd, Rachael Burton, Barb L. Butler, Dianne Dyer, David C. Evans, Melissa Felteau, Russell L. Gruen, Kenneth M. Jaffe, John Kortbeek, Eddy Lang, Val Lougheed, Lynne Moore, Michelle Narciso, Peter Oxland, Frederick P. Rivara, Derek Roberts, Diana Sarakbi, Karen Vine, Henry T. Stelfox

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the content validity of quality criteria for providing patient- and family-centered injury care. Background: Quality criteria have been developed for clinical injury care, but not patient- and family-centered injury care. Methods: Using a modified Research AND Development Corporation (RAND)/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a panel of 16 patients, family members, injury and quality of care experts serially rated and revised criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care identified from patient and family focus groups. The criteria were then sent to 384 verified trauma centers in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand for evaluation. Results: A total of 46 criteria were rated and revised by the panel over 4 rounds of review producing 14 criteria related to clinical care (n = 4; transitions of care, pain management, patient safety, provider competence), communication (n = 3; information for patients/families; communication of discharge plans to patients/families, communication between hospital and community providers), holistic care (n = 4; patient hygiene, kindness and respect, family access to patient, social and spiritual support) and end-of-life care (n = 3; decision making, end-of-life care, family follow-up). Medical directors, managers, or coordinators representing 254 trauma centers (66% response rate) rated 12 criteria to be important (95% of responses) for patient- and family-centered injury care. Fewer centers rated family access to the patient (80%) and family follow-up after patient death (65%) to be important criteria. Conclusions: Fourteen-candidate quality criteria for patient- and family-centered injury care were developed and shown to have content validity. These may be used to guide quality improvement practices.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)287-296
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2017
Externally publishedYes


  • consensus
  • critical care
  • family
  • focus groups
  • health care
  • hospitals
  • outcome assessment
  • patient participation
  • patient-centered care
  • quality assurance
  • quality improvement
  • quality indicators
  • quality of health care
  • reproducibility of results
  • surveys and questionnaires
  • wounds and injuries

Cite this