Article

Evaluation properties of the French version of the OUT-PATSAT35 satisfaction with care questionnaire according to classical and item response theory analyses

Quality of Life Research (Impact Factor: 2.49). 03/2014; 23(7). DOI: 10.1007/s11136-014-0658-z
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

The present study investigates the properties of the French version of the OUT-PATSAT35 questionnaire, which evaluates the outpatients' satisfaction with care in oncology using classical analysis (CTT) and item response theory (IRT).
This cross-sectional multicenter study includes 692 patients who completed the questionnaire at the end of their ambulatory treatment. CTT analyses tested the main psychometric properties (convergent and divergent validity, and internal consistency). IRT analyses were conducted separately for each OUT-PATSAT35 domain (the doctors, the nurses or the radiation therapists and the services/organization) by models from the Rasch family. We examined the fit of the data to the model expectations and tested whether the model assumptions of unidimensionality, monotonicity and local independence were respected.
A total of 605 (87.4 %) respondents were analyzed with a mean age of 64 years (range 29-88). Internal consistency for all scales separately and for the three main domains was good (Cronbach's α 0.74-0.98). IRT analyses were performed with the partial credit model. No disordered thresholds of polytomous items were found. Each domain showed high reliability but fitted poorly to the Rasch models. Three items in particular, the item about "promptness" in the doctors' domain and the items about "accessibility" and "environment" in the services/organization domain, presented the highest default of fit. A correct fit of the Rasch model can be obtained by dropping these items. Most of the local dependence concerned items about "information provided" in each domain. A major deviation of unidimensionality was found in the nurses' domain.
CTT showed good psychometric properties of the OUT-PATSAT35. However, the Rasch analysis revealed some misfitting and redundant items. Taking the above problems into consideration, it could be interesting to refine the questionnaire in a future study.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Amélie Anota, Mar 14, 2014
  • Source
    • "For the WHOQOL-BREF, construct validity has been evaluated by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses [2], multitrait analysis [3] and Pearson correlations [4]. As a modern psychometric method, Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis has been invited into questionnaire development, refinement, evaluation, and item reduction [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. In particular, IRT analysis can also be used for evaluating construct validity of a scale. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was to evaluate the construct validity of WHOQOL-BREF & Disabilities module for physical disabilities (PD) and intellectual disabilities (ID) people, using Item Response Theory (IRT) Graded Response Model (GRM) analysis. As one of 14 centres for the field study of the WHOQOL Disabilities module, a stratified representative sample of Guangzhou general disabled people was approached for interview. It contained 1000 respondents: 807 physical disabled people and 193 intellectual disabled people. IRT GRM analysis was used to evaluate the construct validity of WHOQOL-BREF & Disabilities module. Each domain of WHOQOL-BREF showed appropriate fit to the two-parameter IRT GRM. The Disabilities module as overall one domain had a better fitting than as three domains. Discrimination parameters of item 3, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 25 were statistically equal to one for both the PD 5-point response version and the ID 3-point response version of the scales. The domain test information curves showed that the PD group had a larger range of scale scores of information >5 than the ID group. The construct validity of WHOQOL-BREF and Disabilities module using GRM analysis complements previous validation studies.
    Full-text · Conference Paper · Nov 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Cancer care is increasingly provided in the outpatient setting, requiring specific monitoring of care quality. The patients' perspective is an important indicator of care quality and needs to be assessed with well designed, psychometrically sound questionnaires. We performed a systematic literature review of currently available patient satisfaction measures for use in cancer outpatient care settings. Methods: We carried out MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus searches of papers published over the past 15 years that describe cancer patient satisfaction questionnaires for use in the outpatient setting. We used the adapted COSMIN checklist to assess the quality of the questionnaires' measurement properties. Results: A total of 6677 citations were identified and 76 relevant articles were read, of which 55 were found either not to be relevant or to provide insufficient psychometric information. The remaining 21 studies pertained to 14 patient satisfaction questionnaires. Continuity and transition, accessibility, and involvement of family/friends were less frequently addressed despite their relevance in outpatient oncology. Almost half of the psychometric studies did not provide information on item level missing data. Most internal consistency estimates (Cronbach's α) were satisfactory. Few studies reported test-retest assessment (n = 5), used confirmatory factor analysis (n = 2), or assessed fit to a graded response item response theory model (n = 3). Only three questionnaires were cross-culturally validated. Conclusion: Important aspects of care may be missed by current patient satisfaction questionnaires for use in the cancer outpatient setting. Additional evidence is needed of their psychometric performance, especially for cross-cultural comparative assessments. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    No preview · Article · Sep 2014 · Psycho-Oncology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: General questionnaires are often used to assess quality of life in patients with spine metastases, although a disease-specific survey did not exist until recently. The Spine Oncology Study Group has developed an outcomes questionnaire (SOSG-OQ) to measure quality of life in these patients. However, a scoring system was not developed, and the questionnaire was not validated in a group of patients, nor was it compared with other general quality of life questionnaires such as the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2015 · The spine journal: official journal of the North American Spine Society