A Spanish adaptation of the Quality in Psychiatric Care – Inpatient Staff (QPC-IPS) instrument: Psychometric properties and factor structure
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23938/ASSN.0921Keywords:
Inpatient care, Psychometric properties, Mental health professionals, Nursing, Quality of careAbstract
Background. Western countries share an interest in evaluating quality of care in the healthcare field. In spite of this, there is a lack of intercultural comparison of the perceptions of professionals. One reason for this may be the lack of standardized instruments. The objective of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties and dimensions of the Spanish version of the Quality in Psychiatric Care-Inpatients Staff (QPC-IPS) instrument.
Methods. After translation and revision of the instrument by a panel of experts, a questionnaire was obtained in Spanish that was administered to a pilot sample. A total of 163 professionals participated in the study.
Results. After conducting pilot testing and a cognitive interview with 30 professionals, it was determined that the QPC-IPS was adequate and could be self-administered. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed six factors that explained 60.9% of the variation. In terms of internal consistency, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92 was obtained for the full instrument. For test re-test reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient for the overall questionnaire was 0.91. Convergent validity was analyzed using the NTP394 satisfaction instrument, yielding a positive correlation (0.58).
Conclusions. The results demonstrated that the psychometric properties in terms of internal consistency, temporal stability (test-retest), content validity, and construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis) were adequate. These results confirm that the structure of the Spanish version is similar to the original Swedish version of the QPC-IP.
Downloads
References
AIMOLA L, JASIM S, TRIPATHI N, BASSETT P, QUIRK A, WORRALL A et al. Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18: 994. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3797-z
BOYER L, LANCO̧N C, BAUMSTARCK K, PAROLA N, BERBIS J, AUQUIER P. Evaluating the impact of a quality of life assessment with feedback to clinicians in patients with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2013. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.112.123463
PALUDETTO M, CAMUCCIO CA, CUTRONE F, COCCHIO S, BALDO V. Can we have routine measurement of patient satisfaction in acute psychiatric settings? A cross sectional study. Arch Psychiatr Nurs 2015; 29: 447-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2015.07.006
NUGTER MA, HERMENS MLM, ROBBERS S, VAN SON G, THEUNISSEN J, ENGELSBEL F. Use of outcome measurements in clinical practice: how specific should one be? Psychother Res 2019; 29: 432-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2017.1408975
BARTLETT, P, SANDLAND, R. Mental health law: policy and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Information Resources Management Association. Healthcare ethics and training : concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2017.
SCHRÖDER A, AHLSTRÖM G, LARSSON BW. Patients’ perceptions of the concept of the quality of care in the psychiatric setting: a phenomenographic study. J Clin Nurs 2006; 15: 93-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01241.x
FARR M, CRESSEY P. Understanding staff perspectives of quality in practice in healthcare. BMC Health Serv Res 2015; 15: 123. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0788-1
KANE CF. The 2014 Scope and standards of practice for psychiatric mental health nursing: key updates. Online J Issues Nurs 2015; 20: 1.
BEE P, BROOKS H, FRASER C, LOVELL K. Professional perspectives on service user and carer involvement in mental health care planning: a qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud 2015; 52: 1834-1845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.07.008
MASON T, LOVELL A, COYLE D. Forensic psychiatric nursing: skills and competencies: I role dimensions. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2008; 15: 118-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2007.01191.x
SALYERS MP, FUKUI S, ROLLINS AL, FIRMIN R, GEARHART T, NOLL JP et al. Burnout and self-reported quality of care in community mental health. Adm Policy Ment Health 2015; 42: 61-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-014-0544-6
HENDERSON C, HALES H, RUGGERI M. Cross-cultural differences in the conceptualisation of patients’ satisfaction with psychiatric services-content validity of the English version of the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2003; 38: 142-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-003-0606-7
LUNDQVIST LO, SURYANI AN, RAFIYAH I, SCHRÖDER A. Indonesian adaptation of the Quality in Psychiatric Care - Inpatient (QPC-IP) instrument: psychometric properties and factor structure. Asian J Psychiatr 2018; 34: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2018.03.006
SANCHEZ-BALCELLS S, CALLARISA ROCA M, RODRIGUEZ-ZUNINO N, PUIG-LLOBET M, LLUCH-CANUT MT, ROLDAN-MERINO JF. Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs 2018; 74: 2497-2510. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13813
ARNETZ BB. Staff perception of the impact of health care transformation on quality of care. Int J Qual Heal Care 1999; 11: 345-351. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/11.4.345
LAKER C, ROSE D, FLACH C, CSIPKE E, MCCRONE P, CRAIG T et al. Views of the Therapeutic Environment (VOTE): stakeholder involvement in measuring staff perceptions of acute in-patient care. Int J Nurs Stud 2012; 49: 1403-1410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.06.001
DEMARCO R, FLAHERTY L, GLOD C, MERRILL N, TERK K, PLASSE M. Staff & client perceptions of unit quality: a pilot study. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Heal Serv 2004; 42: 36. https://doi.org/10.3928/02793695-20040501-06
SCHRÖDER A, WILDE-LARSSON B, AHLSTROM G. Quality in psychiatric care: an instrument evaluating patients’ expectations and experiences. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2007; 20, 141-160. http://doi.org/10.1108/09526860710731834
MOKKINK LB, TERWEE CB, KNOL DL, STRATFORD PW, ALONSO J, PATRICK DL et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22
American Educational Research Association. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, 2014; 33-47.
STREINER DL, NORMAN GR, CAIRNEY J. Health measurement scales : a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford. 5ª ed. Oxford University Press, 2015: 399.
ZOU GY. Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Stat Med 2012; 31: 3972-3981. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5466
WARR PB, COOK JD, WALL TD. Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and aspects of psychological well-being. J Occup Psychol 1979; 131: 241-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1979.tb00448.x
PÉREZ J, FIDALGO M. NTP 394: Satisfacción laboral: escala general de satisfacción. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Seguridad e Higiene en el Trabajo, 1994. https://saludlaboralydiscapacidad.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/NTP-394-Satisfacci%C3%B3n-laboral-escala-general-de-satisfacci%C3%B3n.pdf
WARE JE, GANDEK B. Methods for testing data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 945-952.
RIAL A, VARELA J, ABALO J, LÉVY JP. El análisis factorial confirmatorio. En: Varela Mallou J, editor. Modelización con estructuras de covarianzas en ciencias sociales : temas esenciales, avanzados y aportaciones especiales. La Coruña: Netbiblo, 2006: 119-154.
EQS 6.2 for Windows. Encino:CA: Multivariate Software Inc, 2006.
LUNDQVIST LO, SURYANI Y, HERMIATI D, SUTINI T, SCHRÖDER A. A psychometric evaluation of the Indonesian version of the Quality in Psychiatric Care – Inpatient Staff (QPC-IPS) instrument. Asian J Psychiatr 2019; 46: 29-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2019.09.027
NUNNALLY JC, BERNSTEIN IH. The theory of measurement error. Psychometric Theory New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994; 209-247.
DELANEY KR, JOHNSON ME, FOGG L. Development and testing of the Combined Assessment of Psychiatric Environments: a patient-centered quality measure for inpatient psychiatric treatment. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc 2015; 21: 134-147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078390315581338
BJERTNAES OA, GARRATT A, NESSA J. The GPS’ Experiences Questionnaire (GPEQ): reliability and validity following a national survey to assess GPs’ views of district psychiatric services. Fam Pract 2007; 24: 336-342. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmm025
GARRATT A, BJØRNGAARD JH, DAHLE KA, BJERTNÆS ØA, SAUNES IS, RUUD T. The Psychiatric Out-Patient Experiences Questionnaire (POPEQ): data quality, reliability and validity in patients attending 90 Norwegian clinics. Nord J Psychiatry 2006; 60: 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039480600583464
MARTÍNEZ GONZÁLEZ MA, SÁNCHEZ VILLEGAS A, TOLEDO ATUCHA EA, FAULIN-FAJARDO J. Bioestadística amigable. Barcelona: Elsevier, 2014.
WORTHINGTON R, WHITTAKER T. Scale development research: a content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Couns Psychol 2006; 34: 806-838.
HAIR JF, ANDERSON RE, TATHAM RL, BLACK WC. Multivariate data analysis: with readings. Statistics 1995; 151: 1-5.
SCHRÖDER A, AHLSTRÖM G, LARSSON BW, LUNDQVIST L-O. Psychometric properties of the Quality in Psychiatric Care - Outpatient (QPC-OP) instrument. Int J Ment Health Nurs 2011; 20: 445-453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0349.2011.00741.x
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
La revista Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra es publicada por el Departamento de Salud del Gobierno de Navarra (España), quien conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright ) sobre el artículo publicado y favorece y permite la difusión del mismo bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-SA 4.0). Esta licencia permite copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente el artículo, siempre que siempre que se cite la autoría y la publicación inicial en Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, y se distinga la existencia de esta licencia de uso.
