Background and aim Western countries share an interest in evaluating and improving quality of care in the healthcare field. The aim was to develop and examine the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Spanish version of the Quality in Psychiatric Care–Inpatient (QPC-IP) instrument. Methods A psychometric study was conducted, translating the QPC-IPS instrument into Spanish, revision of the instrument by a panel of experts, and assessing its psychometric properties. 150 psychiatric inpatients completed the QPC-IP. Test-retest reliability was assessed by re-administering the questionnaire to 75 of these patients. Results After conducting pilot testing and a cognitive interview with 30 inpatients, it was determined that the QPC-IPS was adequate and could be self-administered. A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.94 was obtained for the full instrument and values of 0.52–0.89 for the various dimensions of the questionnaire. Test re test reliability: The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for the full questionnaire was 0.69, while for the individual dimensions values between 0.62 and 0.74 were obtained, indicating acceptable temporal stability. Convergent validity was analysed using 10-point numerical satisfaction scale, giving a positive correlation (0.49). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed six factors consistent with the original scale. The Spanish version yielded adequate results in terms of validity and reliability. Conclusion Our findings provide evidence of the convergent validity, reliability, temporal stability and construct validity of the Spanish QPC-IP for measuring patient quality in psychiatric care in Spanish hospitals. Hospital administrators can use this tool to assess and identify areas for improvement to enhance quality in psychiatric care.

Quality of care is a multidimensional concept that should include the perspectives of all parties involved. There are few instruments with adequate psychometric properties for the assessment of the quality of psychiatric care in community mental health. Quality in Psychiatric Care-Outpatient Staff (QPC-OPS) instrument has adequate psychometric properties to evaluate the quality of psychiatric care from the perspective of professionals. The aim of this study was to validate the Spanish version of the QPC-OPS instrument. The instrument was translated and back-translated, and then was administered to 260 professionals from distinct community mental health services. To assess test–retest reliability, it was re-administered after 7–14 days (n = 157). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed an 8-factor-structure identical to the original version, showing the good fit of the model. The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) was 0.885. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.847 (95% IC 0.790–0.888), which was higher than 0.70 in all factors bar one. The NT394 General Satisfaction Scale was used for analysis of convergent validity showing a rho correlation of 0.31 (p < 0.0001). Results show that the Spanish version of the QPC-OPS instrument is valid and reliable for the assessment of the quality of psychiatric care in the community setting.

Background Health systems in the field of mental health are strongly committed to community models that allow patients to be attended in their own environment. This helps them to maintain their family and social ties while trying to avoid costly hospital admissions. The patients’ perspective is a key component in the assessment of the quality of psychiatric care and can even determine their adherence to the devices where they are treated. However, there are few instruments with adequate psychometric properties for the evaluation of the quality of psychiatric care in community mental health. The Quality in Psychiatric Care – Outpatient (QPC-OP) instrument has adequate psychometric properties to assess the quality of psychiatric care from the patients’ perspective. The aim of this study was to adapt and validate the Spanish version of the QPC-OP instrument. Methods A translation and back-translation of the instrument was carried out. To examine its psychometric properties, the instrument was administered to 200 patients attending various community mental health services. To assess test-retest reliability, the instrument was readministered after 7-14 days (n = 98). Results The Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed a structure of 8 factors identical to the original version, with an adequate model fit. The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) was 0.951. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.764 (95% IC: 0.649 – 0.842), and higher than 0.70 in 5 of the 8 factors. Additionally, an EFA was performed and revealed that the instrument could behave in a unifactorial or four factor manner in the sample analyzed. Conclusions Results show that the Spanish version of the QPC-OP instrument is valid and reliable for the assessment of quality of psychiatric care in the community setting.

The current paradigm of mental health care focuses on care provided in the community, increasingly moving away from hospital care models that involve considerable economic burden. Patient and staff perspectives on the quality of psychiatric care can highlight strengths and areas for improvement to ensure better care provision. The aim of this study was to describe and compare perceptions of quality of care among patients and staff in community mental health services and to determine possible relationships between these perceptions and other study variables. A comparative cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in a sample of 200 patients and 260 staff from community psychiatric care services in the area of Barcelona (Spain). The results showed high overall levels of quality of care from patient (m = 104.35 ± 13.57) and staff (m =102.06 ± 8.80) perspectives. Patients and staff both gave high scores to Encounter and Support factors, while factors concerning patient Participation and Environment received the lowest scores. Continuous assessment of the quality of psychiatric care in the community setting is essential to ensure the highest quality of care, taking the perspectives of those involved into account.

Abstract"Quality in Psychiatric Care-Forensic Inpatient Staff (QPC-FIPS) is an instrument of Swedish origin validated to measure the perception of the quality of mental health care provided by forensic psychiatry professionals. The aim of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the QPC-FIPS instrument and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the instrument. A psychometric study was carried out. For validity, content validity, convergent validity and construct validity were included. For reliability, the analysis of internal consistency and temporal stability was included. The sample consisted of 153 mental health professionals from four Forensic Psychiatry units. The adapted Spanish version of the QPC-FIPS scale was configured with the same number of items and dimensions as the original. The psychometric properties, in terms of temporal stability and internal consistency, were adequate and the factor structure, such as the homogeneity of the dimensions of the Spanish version of the QPC-FIPS, was equivalent to the original Swedish version. We found that the QPC_FIPS-Spanish is a valid, reliable and easy-to-apply instrument for assessing the self-perception of professionals regarding the care they provide.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Health systems in the field of mental health are strongly committed to community models that allow patients to be attended in their own environment. This helps them to maintain their family and social ties while trying to avoid costly hospital admissions. The patients’ perspective is a key component in the assessment of the quality of psychiatric care and can even determine their adherence to the devices where they are treated. However, there are few instruments with adequate psychometric properties for the evaluation of the quality of psychiatric care in community mental health. The Quality in Psychiatric Care – Outpatient (QPC-OP) instrument has adequate psychometric properties to assess the quality of psychiatric care from the patients’ perspective. The aim of this study was to validate the Spanish version of the QPC-OP instrument. Methods A translation and back-translation of the instrument was carried out. To examine its psychometric properties, the instrument was administered to 200 patients attending various community mental health services. To assess test-retest reliability, the instrument was readministered after 7–14 days (n = 98). Results The Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed a structure of 8 factors identical to the original version, with an adequate model fit. The internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) was 0.951. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.764 (95% IC: 0.649–0.842), and higher than 0.70 in 5 of the 8 factors. Conclusions Results show that the Spanish version of the QPC-OP instrument is valid and reliable for the assessment of quality of psychiatric care in the community setting.