OBJECTIVES: The EORTC Quality of Life (QL) Group has developed a questionnaire (the EORTC IN-PATSAT32) to assess the satisfaction of cancer inpatients with hospitalbased care. In this study we assess the psychometric properties of the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 applied to a sample of Spanish patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty cancer patients with different tumour sites completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaires. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability and validity was conducted. RESULTS: Multitrait scaling analysis showed that most itemscale correlation coefficients met the standards of convergent and discriminant validity. Cronbach's coefficients were good (0.77-0.97) for all scales except hospital access. Correlations between the scales and single items of the QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were generally low. Correlations between the Oberst scales and an item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward to others with the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were moderate. Patients with higher scores on the Oberst scales and the item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward showed higher satisfaction with care levels in all EORTC IN-PATSAT32 areas but one. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC IN-PATSAT32 appears to be a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish cancer patients. These results are in line with those of the EORTC validation study.
OBJECTIVES: The EORTC Quality of Life (QL) Group has developed a questionnaire (the EORTC IN-PATSAT32) to assess the satisfaction of cancer inpatients with hospitalbased care. In this study we assess the psychometric properties of the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 applied to a sample of Spanish patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty cancerpatients with different tumour sites completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaires. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability and validity was conducted. RESULTS: Multitrait scaling analysis showed that most itemscale correlation coefficients met the standards of convergent and discriminant validity. Cronbach's coefficients were good (0.77-0.97) for all scales except hospital access. Correlations between the scales and single items of the QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were generally low. Correlations between the Oberst scales and an item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward to others with the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were moderate. Patients with higher scores on the Oberst scales and the item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward showed higher satisfaction with care levels in all EORTC IN-PATSAT32 areas but one. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC IN-PATSAT32 appears to be a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish cancerpatients. These results are in line with those of the EORTC validation study.
Authors: A Brédart; A Bottomley; J M Blazeby; T Conroy; C Coens; S D'Haese; Wei-Chu Chie; E Hammerlid; J I Arraras; F Efficace; C Rodary; S Schraub; M Costantini; A Costantini; F Joly; O Sezer; D Razavi; M Mehlitz; M Bielska-Lasota; N K Aaronson Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Rollon Poinsot; A Altmeyer; T Conroy; A Savignoni; B Asselain; I Léonard; E Marx; M Cosquer; M Sévellec; J Gledhill; C Rodary; M Mercier; P Dickès; M Fabbro; P Antoine; S Guerif; S Schraub; S Dolbeault; A Brédart Journal: Bull Cancer Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 1.276
Authors: K Bjordal; A de Graeff; P M Fayers; E Hammerlid; C van Pottelsberghe; D Curran; M Ahlner-Elmqvist; E J Maher; J W Meyza; A Brédart; A L Söderholm; J J Arraras; J S Feine; H Abendstein; R P Morton; T Pignon; P Huguenin; A Bottomly; S Kaasa Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: A Brédart; V Mignot; A Rousseau; S Dolbeault; N Beauloye; V Adam; C Elie; I Léonard; B Asselain; T Conroy Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2004-08
Authors: Lei Zhang; Zhenbo Dai; Siying Cheng; Shumin Xie; Stephanie Mu-Lian Woo; Zhiqin Luo; Jinglian Wu; Tianwen Gao; Jiahao Liu; Kai Zhang; Jing Zhang; Xinyu Jia; Adam R Miller; Changli Wang Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-02-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Juan Ignacio Arraras; Ana Manterola; Berta Hernández; Fernando Arias de la Vega; Maite Martínez; Meritxell Vila; Clara Eito; Ruth Vera; Miguel Ángel Domínguez Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Juan Ignacio Arraras; Jose Juan Illarramendi; Antonio Viudez; Maria Jose Lecumberri; Susana de la Cruz; Berta Hernandez; Uxue Zarandona; Anne Bredart; Maite Martinez; Esteban Salgado; Nuria Lainez; Ruth Vera Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-05-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Koen I Neijenhuijs; Femke Jansen; Neil K Aaronson; Anne Brédart; Mogens Groenvold; Bernhard Holzner; Caroline B Terwee; Pim Cuijpers; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Patricia Dias; Daniel Clerc; Maria Goreti da Rocha Rodrigues; Nicolas Demartines; Fabian Grass; Martin Hübner Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 4.241