40
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Measuring patient satisfaction with four items: validity of the client satisfaction questionnaire 4 in an outpatient population

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Patient satisfaction with mental health services has for several decades been considered an important component when evaluating service quality. It is often assessed in the context of monitoring quality of care, developing or evaluating newly implemented interventions or changes in practice. Because of this, patient satisfaction questionnaires are often added to longer questionnaire batteries, and shorter questionnaires are preferred to prevent respondent fatigue and non-compliance and to secure easy implementation. However, most studies use unvalidated patient satisfaction measures, making comparisons between studies difficult. Validation studies of short patient satisfaction measures are therefore warranted.

          Methods

          The primary aim was to examine the construct validity and internal reliability of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-4 (CSQ-4) in a Norwegian outpatient mental health setting. A total of 467 patients were recruited from an outpatient psychiatric care clinic in Central Norway. The secondary aim was to examine an earlier proposed cutoff for classifying dissatisfied patients in this new population. A principal component analysis was conducted to evaluate factor structure, correlation analyses were conducted to test for predicted relationships, and Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to examine internal reliability.

          Results

          The CSQ-4 showed a clear unidimensional structure with one factor explaining 80% of its variance. Its internal reliability was very high, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92. As hypothesised this study found no statistically significant sex differences in satisfaction and no statistically significant association between age and satisfaction. Positive changes in symptoms during treatment and higher post-treatment functional impairment were associated with higher patient-reported treatment satisfaction scores, which indicates good construct validity.

          Conclusion

          This is the first study to evaluate the CSQ-4 in a psychiatric population. The CSQ-4 demonstrated good structural validity and internal reliability and was correlated with outcome variables in terms of symptom change and post-treatment functioning. In sum, this indicates that the CSQ-4 is a good short alternative for evaluating patient satisfaction in routine outpatient mental health care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

            Recently, an increasing number of systematic reviews have been published in which the measurement properties of health status questionnaires are compared. For a meaningful comparison, quality criteria for measurement properties are needed. Our aim was to develop quality criteria for design, methods, and outcomes of studies on the development and evaluation of health status questionnaires. Quality criteria for content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, construct validity, reproducibility, longitudinal validity, responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, and interpretability were derived from existing guidelines and consensus within our research group. For each measurement property a criterion was defined for a positive, negative, or indeterminate rating, depending on the design, methods, and outcomes of the validation study. Our criteria make a substantial contribution toward defining explicit quality criteria for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Our criteria can be used in systematic reviews of health status questionnaires, to detect shortcomings and gaps in knowledge of measurement properties, and to design validation studies. The future challenge will be to refine and complete the criteria and to reach broad consensus, especially on quality criteria for good measurement properties.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire.

              The Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) was developed as a screening instrument but its administration time has limited its clinical usefulness. To determine if the self-administered PRIME-MD Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) has validity and utility for diagnosing mental disorders in primary care comparable to the original clinician-administered PRIME-MD. Criterion standard study undertaken between May 1997 and November 1998. Eight primary care clinics in the United States. Of a total of 3000 adult patients (selected by site-specific methods to avoid sampling bias) assessed by 62 primary care physicians (21 general internal medicine, 41 family practice), 585 patients had an interview with a mental health professional within 48 hours of completing the PHQ. Patient Health Questionnaire diagnoses compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; health care use; and treatment/referral decisions. A total of 825 (28%) of the 3000 individuals and 170 (29%) of the 585 had a PHQ diagnosis. There was good agreement between PHQ diagnoses and those of independent mental health professionals (for the diagnosis of any 1 or more PHQ disorder, kappa = 0.65; overall accuracy, 85%; sensitivity, 75%; specificity, 90%), similar to the original PRIME-MD. Patients with PHQ diagnoses had more functional impairment, disability days, and health care use than did patients without PHQ diagnoses (for all group main effects, P<.001). The average time required of the physician to review the PHQ was far less than to administer the original PRIME-MD (<3 minutes for 85% vs 16% of the cases). Although 80% of the physicians reported that routine use of the PHQ would be useful, new management actions were initiated or planned for only 117 (32%) of the 363 patients with 1 or more PHQ diagnoses not previously recognized. Our study suggests that the PHQ has diagnostic validity comparable to the original clinician-administered PRIME-MD, and is more efficient to use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Henrik.Pedersen@ntnu.no
                Journal
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-244X
                7 November 2023
                7 November 2023
                2023
                : 23
                : 808
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Psychiatry, Nidaros Community Mental Health Centre, St. Olavs University Hospital, ( https://ror.org/01a4hbq44) Trondheim, Norway
                [2 ]Department of Mental Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), ( https://ror.org/05xg72x27) Trondheim, Norway
                [3 ]GRID grid.266102.1, ISNI 0000 0001 2297 6811, Department of Psychiatry and Graduate Division, , University of California, ; San Francisco, USA
                [4 ]Tamalpais Matrix Systems, LLC, Chicago, USA
                [5 ]Division of Psychiatry, Nidelv Community Mental Health Centre, St. Olavs University Hospital, ( https://ror.org/01a4hbq44) Trondheim, Norway
                [6 ]Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), ( https://ror.org/05xg72x27) Trondheim, Norway
                Article
                5310
                10.1186/s12888-023-05310-w
                10630992
                37936112
                61495d1c-f7f4-4132-b224-c86ba04a73cf
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 14 June 2023
                : 25 October 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology (incl St. Olavs Hospital - Trondheim University Hospital)
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                patient satisfaction,mental health,client satisfaction questionnaire,validity,patient-reported experience,quality of mental healthcare,quality of care,satisfaction with treatment

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content172

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors723