Peter Esser1, Leon Sautier2, Susanne Sarkar3, Georgia Schilling4,5, Carsten Bokemeyer6, Uwe Koch2, Michael Friedrich7, Gautier Defossez8, Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf7. 1. Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. Peter.Esser@medizin.uni-leipzig.de. 2. Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Movement Sciences, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 4. "Hubertus Wald" Tumor Centre, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Department of Clinical Oncology, Asklepios Tumorzentrum Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 6. Department of Internal Medicine II, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 7. Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 8. UFR Médecine Et Pharmacie, Université de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The assessment of patient satisfaction during treatment is essential to provide patient-centered high-quality cancer care. Nevertheless, no German instrument assesses patient satisfaction with comprehensive cancer care, which not only includes oncological treatment, but also interpersonal quality of care as well as psychosocial support services. Based on the French REPERES-60, we developed the German Patient Satisfaction with Comprehensive Cancer Care (SCCC) questionnaire. METHODS: The REPERES-60 was translated and the items were adapted to make it applicable to the German healthcare system and across different tumor entities. Scales of the resulting instrument were extracted via principal axis factoring (PAF). Subsequently, we investigated the reliability (Cronbach's Alpha, CA), discriminatory power (corrected item-scale correlations) and convergent validity (pre-specified correlations of the SCCC with different outcomes). RESULTS: The SCCC consisted of 32 items which were subsequently tested among a sample of 333 patients across different tumor entities (response rate: 47%). Average age was 59 years (standard deviation: 14), 63% were male. PAF revealed four multi-item scales named Competence, Information, Access and Support accounting for 71% of the variance. Two single-items scales assess global satisfaction with medical and psychosocial care, respectively. CA across the multi-item scales ranged from .84 to .96. Discriminatory power was sufficiently high, with all r ≥ .5. Convergent validity was largely verified by negative associations of the four multi-item scales with depressive/anxious symptomatology (r ≥ - .18, p < .01) and fatigue/overall symptom burden (r ≥ - .14, p < .01). CONCLUSION: We developed a tool to assess patient satisfaction with comprehensive cancer care in Germany. The SCCC showed satisfactory psychometric properties. Further studies are needed to verify these preliminary findings.
PURPOSE: The assessment of patient satisfaction during treatment is essential to provide patient-centered high-quality cancer care. Nevertheless, no German instrument assesses patient satisfaction with comprehensive cancer care, which not only includes oncological treatment, but also interpersonal quality of care as well as psychosocial support services. Based on the French REPERES-60, we developed the German Patient Satisfaction with Comprehensive Cancer Care (SCCC) questionnaire. METHODS: The REPERES-60 was translated and the items were adapted to make it applicable to the German healthcare system and across different tumor entities. Scales of the resulting instrument were extracted via principal axis factoring (PAF). Subsequently, we investigated the reliability (Cronbach's Alpha, CA), discriminatory power (corrected item-scale correlations) and convergent validity (pre-specified correlations of the SCCC with different outcomes). RESULTS: The SCCC consisted of 32 items which were subsequently tested among a sample of 333 patients across different tumor entities (response rate: 47%). Average age was 59 years (standard deviation: 14), 63% were male. PAF revealed four multi-item scales named Competence, Information, Access and Support accounting for 71% of the variance. Two single-items scales assess global satisfaction with medical and psychosocial care, respectively. CA across the multi-item scales ranged from .84 to .96. Discriminatory power was sufficiently high, with all r ≥ .5. Convergent validity was largely verified by negative associations of the four multi-item scales with depressive/anxious symptomatology (r ≥ - .18, p < .01) and fatigue/overall symptom burden (r ≥ - .14, p < .01). CONCLUSION: We developed a tool to assess patient satisfaction with comprehensive cancer care in Germany. The SCCC showed satisfactory psychometric properties. Further studies are needed to verify these preliminary findings.
Authors: Pascal Jean-Pierre; Kevin Fiscella; Karen M Freund; Jack Clark; Julie Darnell; Alan Holden; Douglas Post; Steven R Patierno; Paul C Winters Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 6.860
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: A M M De Vries; M M Gholamrezaee; I M Verdonck-de Leeuw; J Passchier; J-N Despland; F Stiefel; Y de Roten Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-09-04 Impact factor: 3.894