Assessing the health care needs of women in rural British
Columbia: Development and validation of a survey tool |
| |
Authors: | Meghan Guy Wendy V Norman Unjali Malhotra |
| |
Institution: | Dr Guy is a family physician currently practising in rural British Columbia as a locum tenens physician. Dr Norman is Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Practice at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. Dr Malhotra is Medical Director of Options for Sexual Health—British Columbia, is affiliated with BC Women''s Hospital and Health Centre, and is Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of British Columbia |
| |
Abstract: | ObjectiveTo design reliable survey instruments to evaluate needs and expectations for
provision of women''s health services in rural communities in British
Columbia (BC). These tools will aim to plan programming for, and evaluate
effectiveness of, a women''s health enhanced skills residency program
at the University of British Columbia.DesignA qualitative design that included administration of written surveys and
on-site interviews in several rural communities.SettingThree communities participated in initial questionnaire and interview
administration. A fourth community participated in the second interview
iteration. Participating communities did not have obstetrician-gynecologists
but did have hospitals capable of supporting outpatient specialized
women''s health procedural care.ParticipantsCommunity physicians, leaders of community groups serving women, and allied
health providers, in Vancouver Island, Southeast Interior BC, and Northern
BC.MethodsTwo preliminary questionnaires were developed to assess local specialized
women''s health services based on the curriculum of the enhanced
skills training program; one was designed for physicians and the other for
women''s community group leaders and aboriginal health and community
group leaders. Interview questions were designed to ensure the survey could
be understood and to identify important areas of women''s health not
included on the initial questionnaires. Results were analyzed using
quantitative and qualitative methods, and a second draft of the
questionnaires was developed for a second iteration of interviews.Main findingsClarity and comprehension of questionnaires were good; however, nonphysician
participants answered that they were unsure on many questions pertaining to
specific services. Topics identified as important and missing from
questionnaires included violence and mental health. A second version of the
questionnaires was shown to have addressed these concerns.ConclusionThrough iterations of pilot testing, we created 2 validated survey
instruments for implementation as a component of program evaluation. Testing
in remote locations highlighted unique rural concerns, such that University
of British Columbia health care professional training will now better serve
BC community needs. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|