Table 3.

Acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of using the TilThermometer to assess risks for physical exposure. Comparison between hospital and nursing home care units

Construct and item	All care units Mean (SD)	Hospital care units Mean (SD)	Nursing home care units Mean (SD)	P-Value
Acceptability (AIM) (n=54)*
This risk assessment is pretty good	3.9 (0.60)	3.8 (0.63)	4.2 (0.40)	0.005**
This risk assessment is appealing	3.9 (0.63)	3.8 (0.65)	4.3 (0.45)	0.007**
I like this risk assessment	3.9 (0.65)	3.7 (0.64)	4.2 (0.54)	0.013*
I welcome use of this risk assessment	4.0 (0.71)	3.9 (0.70)	4.3 (0.68)	0.073
Total mean value (AIM)	3.93 (0.65)
Appropriateness (IAM) (n=54)*
This risk assessment seems fitting	3.8 (0.65)	3.7 (0.66)	4.1 (0.50)	0.021**
This risk assessment seems suitable	3.8 (0.61)	3.7 (0.62)	4.2 (0.40)	0.004**
This risk assessment seems applicable	4.0 (0.70)	3.9 (0.74)	4.2 (0.54)	0.087
This risk assessment seems well aligned	3.8 (0.68)	3.6 (0.67)	4.2 (0.54)	0.003
Total mean value (IAM)	3.9 (0.66)
Feasibility (FIM) (n=54)*
This risk assessment seems implementable	3.9 (0.68)	3.8 (0.75)	4.2 (0.40)	0.091
This risk assessment seems workable	4.0 (0.66)	3.9 (0.69)	4.3 (0.48)	0.015**
This risk assessment seems doable	4.0 (0.66)	3.9 (0.69)	4.3 (0.48)	0.015**
This risk assessment seems easy to use	3.9 (0.77)	3.8 (0.79)	4.2 (0.66)	0.049*
Total mean value (FIM)	3.97 (0.73)	3.8 (0.75)	4.2 (0.4)	0.045*

All items’ responses are measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree. A higher score indicates a better outcome on all the three measures: the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), the Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) and the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) [28]. * p<0.05, ** p<0.005