| Literature DB >> 34686139 |
Mohd Noor Norhayati1, Adnan Fatin Imtithal2, Yunus Nor Akma2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal satisfaction must be assessed in order to reflect the quality of care, which is considered an outcome of healthcare services. It can also be used to contrast and compare satisfaction with various care models or service configuration or to assess overtime changes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Malay version Women's Views of Birth Postnatal Satisfaction Questionnaire (WOMBPNSQ) based on the Rasch scale model of labour satisfaction.Entities:
Keywords: Postnatal; Postpartum; Psychometric; Rasch model; Satisfaction
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34686139 PMCID: PMC8532326 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-04184-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Initial analysis of person and item summary statistics
| Person ( | Item ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Cronbach’s alpha (α) | 0.50 | |
| Reliability index (μ) | 0.45 | 0.99 |
| Separation index | 0.90 | 9.02 |
| Mean | 0.09 | 0.00 |
| Max measure | 0.70 | 0.54 |
| Min measure | −0.31 | − 0.67 |
| Spread | 1.01 | 1.21 |
| Standard deviation | 0.16 | 0.42 |
| Outfit | ||
| Mean Square | 1.01 | 1.01 |
| z-Standard | −0.20 | 0.20 |
Standardized residual variance using Principal Component Analysis
| Standardized residual variance (in Eigenvalue units) | Eigen | Empirical (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Total raw variance in observations | 52.2 | 100.0 |
| Raw variance explained by measures | 22.2 | 42.6 |
| Raw variance explained by persons | 1.8 | 3.4 |
| Raw variance explained by items | 20.5 | 39.2 |
| Raw unexplained variance (total) | 30.0 | 57.4 |
| Unexplained variance in 1st contrast | 4.0 | 7.7 |
Largest standardized residual correlations for items
| Correlation | Item | Item |
|---|---|---|
| 0.49 | CA_Q30 | FB_Q31 |
| 0.49 | CA_Q4 | PNV_Q7 |
| 0.45 | FB_Q36 | MH_Q16 |
| 0.42 | IPS_Q28 | FB_Q5 |
| 0.36 | CA_Q4 | HS_Q6 |
| 0.36 | CON_Q25 | GPC_Q26 |
| −0.44 | HVC_Q24 | PAB_Q23 |
| −0.39 | CA_Q4 | FB_Q5 |
| −0.37 | CA_Q17 | PNV_Q20 |
| −0.37 | GPC_Q26 | AB_Q23 |
Fig. 1Wright item-person map of Women’s Views of Birth Postnatal Satisfaction Questionnaire
Easily endorsed items for postnatal satisfaction
| Logit | Item | Description |
|---|---|---|
| − 0.45 | PS_Q9 | My carers were never insensitive nor lacked understanding |
| − 0.46 | HS_Q19 | I could have had just a very little more help from my birth partner/husband |
| −0.46 | CA_Q4 | My carers explored adequately with me my contraceptive needs |
| −0.45 | HS_Q6 | My partner met all my needs after the birth |
| −0.51 | PNV_Q7 | The visits I received in my home were always convenient |
| −0.54 | PNV_Q20 | My postnatal check-ups were always at a very convenient time |
| −0.56 | CA_Q30 | My carers discussed the full range of contraception options following the birth of my baby |
| −0.56 | HVC_Q11 | The health visitors were really good at helping me to feed my baby |
| −0.66 | FB_Q31 | I was given lots of help on how to feed my baby |
| −0.67 | HS_Q32 | My partner/husband was the best possible help to me after the baby was born |