TY - JOUR
T1 - Cross-cultural evaluation of the relevance of the HCAHPS survey in five European countries
AU - Squires, Allison
AU - Bruyneel, Luk
AU - Aiken, Linda H.
AU - Van den heede, Koen
AU - Brzostek, Tomasz
AU - Busse, Reinhard
AU - Ensio, Anneli
AU - Schubert, Maria
AU - Zikos, Dimitrios
AU - Sermeus, Walter
N1 - Funding Information:
The RN4CAST project is a 12-country (Belgium, England, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland) comparative nursing workforce study funded by the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Commission aimed at developing innovative forecasting methods for developing and sustaining the nursing workforce [19]. Researchers from the USA also participated in the study under separate funding mechanisms. One goal of the study was to examine if there was a relationship between patient satisfaction and the nursing workforce. Eight of the 12 countries agreed to collect patient satisfaction data as one of the outcomes sensitive to the performance of the nursing workforce. A previously tested instrument for comparing patient satisfaction in Europe, however, was not available to the study’s team.
Funding Information:
This research is funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2012 under (grant agreement 223468); and the National Institute of Nursing Research (R01NR04513, T32NR0714 and P30NR05043 to L.A.).
PY - 2012/10
Y1 - 2012/10
N2 - Objective: To describe the systematic language translation and cross-cultural evaluation process that assessed the relevance of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey in five European countries prior to national data collection efforts. Design: An approach involving a systematic translation process, expert review by experienced researchers and a review by 'patient' experts involving the use of content validity indexing techniques with chance correction. Setting: Five European countries where Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian and Polish are spoken. Participants: 'Patient' experts who had recently experienced a hospitalization in the participating country. Main OutcomeMeasure(s): Content validity indexing with chance correction adjustment providing a quantifiable measure that evaluates the conceptual, contextual, content, semantic and technical equivalence of the instrument in relationship to the patient care experience. Results: All translations except two received 'excellent' ratings and no significant differences existed between scores for languages spoken in more than one country. Patient raters across all countries expressed different concerns about some of the demographic questions and their relevance for evaluating patient satisfaction. Removing demographic questions from the evaluation produced a significant improvement in the scale-level scores (P = .018). The cross-cultural evaluation process suggested that translations and content of the patient satisfaction survey were relevant across countries and languages. Conclusions: The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey is relevant to some European hospital systems and has the potential to produce internationally comparable patient satisfaction scores.
AB - Objective: To describe the systematic language translation and cross-cultural evaluation process that assessed the relevance of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey in five European countries prior to national data collection efforts. Design: An approach involving a systematic translation process, expert review by experienced researchers and a review by 'patient' experts involving the use of content validity indexing techniques with chance correction. Setting: Five European countries where Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian and Polish are spoken. Participants: 'Patient' experts who had recently experienced a hospitalization in the participating country. Main OutcomeMeasure(s): Content validity indexing with chance correction adjustment providing a quantifiable measure that evaluates the conceptual, contextual, content, semantic and technical equivalence of the instrument in relationship to the patient care experience. Results: All translations except two received 'excellent' ratings and no significant differences existed between scores for languages spoken in more than one country. Patient raters across all countries expressed different concerns about some of the demographic questions and their relevance for evaluating patient satisfaction. Removing demographic questions from the evaluation produced a significant improvement in the scale-level scores (P = .018). The cross-cultural evaluation process suggested that translations and content of the patient satisfaction survey were relevant across countries and languages. Conclusions: The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey is relevant to some European hospital systems and has the potential to produce internationally comparable patient satisfaction scores.
KW - Cross-cultural research
KW - HCAHPS
KW - Health services research
KW - Instrument validation
KW - Measurement
KW - Patient satisfaction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866354884&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/intqhc/mzs040
DO - 10.1093/intqhc/mzs040
M3 - Article
C2 - 22807136
AN - SCOPUS:84866354884
VL - 24
SP - 470
EP - 475
JO - International Journal for Quality in Health Care
JF - International Journal for Quality in Health Care
SN - 1353-4505
IS - 5
M1 - mzs040
ER -