Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Firth, H
Right arrow Articles by Richold, P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Firth, H
Right arrow Articles by Richold, P
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Health Medicine 22:473-478 (2000)
© 2000 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

Assessment of parents' concerns and evaluation of outcomes


H Firthz
A Grimes
H Poppleton
R Hall
P Richold

Child Adolescent and Autism Services, Prudhoe Hospital, Prudhoe, Northumberland NE42 5NT, UK
z Corresponding author

Background.Clinical and service evaluation often fails to accommodate sufficiently to parental perspectives and priorities concerning health interventions. Although parent satisfaction questionnaires are widely used, these assess issues chosen by the researcher. Quality of life research methods, however, can assess individual priorities.

Method.A Schedule for Evaluation of Quality of Life was adapted to record the nature, and relative importance of parental concerns about their child before child psychiatric hospital admission. Level of concern or worry was assessed pre- and post-admission, and at 1 year follow-up, with a waiting-list control. Data were analysed qualitatively and quantitatively for individuals and groups of cases.

Results.The adapted instrument was feasible and clinically useful. It did not show repeated measurement effects but was sensitive to the effects of intervention (hospital admission). Effects (reduction in levels of concern) remained evident at 1 year follow-up.

Conclusion.The instrument is brief, non-intrusive, and sensitive to change. It has utility for clinical case evaluation. It may complement satisfaction questionnaires, and has advantages over rating scales for the evaluation of treatment outcomes.

Keywords: evaluation, outcome, parent satisfaction, quality of life


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.