Risser patient satisfaction scale: a validation study in Greek cancer patients

Abstract

BackgroundThe current healthcare climate is characterized by a constant battle for the provision of quality care with limited resources and with patient satisfaction receiving increased attention, there is a need for reliable and valid assessment measures. This study describes the adaptation, testing and validation of the Risser Patient satisfaction Scale in an oncology care setting in Greece. The rationale for this study lies in the scarcity of such measures in the Greek language.MethodsThis is a test retest validation study in Greece. Data were collected from 298 hospitalized cancer patients. The validation methodology included the assessment of the item internal consistency, using the Cronbach alpha coefficient. The test-retest reliability was tested by the Kappa correlation coefficient.ResultsThe scale demonstrated very good psychometric properties. The internal consistency of the instrument was good, Cronbach’s alpha was found to be 0.78 (p<0.001) and Kappa coefficient for reproducibility was found to be K=0.89 (95% CI: 0.83-0.91 p<0.0001).ConclusionThe findings demonstrated strong agreement of the scale, suggesting that the Greek version offers substantial reliability. This study provides a valid and reliable tool to assess patient satisfaction in oncology settings. Means to monitor patient satisfaction, a key aspect of the policy agenda for quality care remain important for nurse leaders to develop better care in oncology settings.

Adult cancer patients satisfaction of nursing care: a cross‐national evaluation of two Southeastern European countries

“…Cronbach's alpha was satisfactory ( α = 0.911), with respective values for the three subscales ranging from 0.745 to 0.852. These values were consistent with those found in previous validation studies (Charalambous 2010; Charalambous and Adamakidou, ).…”

“…The data were collected with the Greek version of the Risser Patient Satisfaction Scale. The instrument was previously translated and validated in the Greek language (Greek–Greek and Greek–Cypriot) showing good levels of reliability and validity, comparable with the original one (Charalambous 2010; Charalambous and Adamakidou, ). Authorization for using the instrument was requested and obtained by its author.…”

“…Measures of satisfaction with care for cancer patients have been developed for clinical studies (Charalambous 2010), and used in hospitals (Crow et al ., 2002), but less for comparison of cancer services, which is an aspect that did not receive enough attention in the literature although some studies exist (Brédart et al ., ; Brédart et al ., ; Skudal et al ., ). Even though other means of evaluating satisfaction with the care have been implemented in cancer care such as interviews and observations, patient satisfaction survey remains the most widely accepted and frequently used mode of objectively and systematically determining cancer patient's perception of the healthcare received (Coulter, ; Charalambous and Adamakidou, ). Furthermore, preceding studies have studied patient satisfaction in specific cancers including but not limited to gastroesophageal (Kavadas et al ., ), breast (Bergenmar et al ., ; Defossez et al ., ), colorectal (Mathiesen et al ., ) and gynaecological (Vashisht et al ., ; von Gruenigen et al ., ).…”

Nursing Intensive‐Care Satisfaction Scale [NICSS]: Development and validation of a patient‐centred instrument

“…Only a few of the questionnaires reviewed indicate the temporal stability of the original scale. A cultural adaptation of the Risser scale (Charalambous & Adamakidou, ) shows a Kappa coefficient for the temporal stability of K (CI of 95%): 0.83 to 0.91 p < .0001) =0.89. The Chinese version of the CARE Q sort (Chen, Yen, Lin, Lee, & Lu, ) reports a suitable temporal stability via Pearson correlation coefficients, which range from 0.83 to 0.92 for the three sub‐scales.…”

Factors Behind Dialysis Patient Satisfaction: Exploring Their Effects on Overall Satisfaction

“…Regarding validity, it is suggested to address this issue by the following four types: (i) face validity—whether the instrument appears to measure what it is designed to measure; (ii) content validity—whether it covers representative facets of what it is intended to measure; (iii) construct validity—the degree to which it measures the underlying concept or construct; and (iv) criterion‐related validity—the degree to which it is associated with valid criterion already known or relevant outcome performance . Among a number of existing assessment tools of patient satisfaction, the following are exceptional examples that their reliability and abovementioned validity seemed to be confirmed: the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) for general patient population; the Patient Satisfaction Instrument (PSI) and the LaMonica‐Oberst Patient Satisfaction Scale (LOPSS) , both of which focused on nursing care; the Patient Judgements of Hospital Quality Questionnaire (PJHQ) and its short version, Patient Judgement System (PJS), which were applicable only to inpatients; and Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS) for outpatients . However, none of these questionnaires measured patients' actual satisfaction, but elicited quality measures of health service perceived by the patient as alternative indices of patient satisfaction .…”