Validation of the OPportunity for Treatment In ONcology (OPTION) questionnaire measuring continuity of care

Abstract

Increasing efforts are ongoing to deliver effective cancer care through integrated networks of services. Measuring patients’ experience of care is essential to identify problematic areas that require organisational adjustments. The aim of the present study was to examine the validity of OPTION questionnaire, designed to measure patient's perceived continuity of care across different phases of their care pathway. The study was carried at the Institute for Cancer Treatment and Research, Meldola and the oncology departments of the Local Health Authority of Romagna, Italy. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to identify factors underlying patients’ perception of continuity of care. Factor scores were compared between patients with or without a care coordinator using Mann–Whitney test. The study sample consisted of 214 patients with breast or colorectal cancer, with a mean age of 62.3 years. Most patients identified the oncologist as their care coordinator. Five factors were extracted using PCA: (1) “trustful relationship with health care staff,” (2) “information on care pathway,” (3) “information on changes related to the illness,” (4) “feelings of abandonment” and (5) “collaboration among health care professionals.” The scores of factors 2 and 3 were significantly higher among those with a care coordinator. The OPTION questionnaire is a reliable instrument that can help clinicians and administrative stakeholder target efforts and resources in the pursuit of quality of care.

Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives: A Case Study of the Lung Cancer Integrated Care Pathway

“…The authors of the study that validated the OPTION questionnaire came up with a five-factor scale to evaluate the responses, specifically factor 1, trustful relationship with health care staff; factor 2, information on care pathway; factor 3, information on physical changes related to the illness; factor 4, feelings of abandonment; and factor 5, collaboration among health care professionals [20]. In our study, trust in the health care staff was important for almost all patients (97.4%); as previously described in the literature [31], our results also show that the involvement of patients in care processes affects their satisfaction with the treatment received (98.7%).…”

“…The OPTION questionnaire, validated in Italy [2023], analyses the continuity of care [2425] perceived by patients with cancer in terms of three major domains: information, management, and relational. There are 33 multiple-choice items on the questionnaire and an open-answer section at the end, which gives patients an opportunity to freely express any suggestions or proposals for improvement that they may have.…”

Impact of health‐related stigma on psychosocial functioning in cancer patients: Construct validity of the stigma‐related social problems scale

“…A major strength of this study is that the performance of the SSP was tested in a larger cancer population than similar validation studies of other instruments (Arraras et al., 2010; Guzelant et al., 2004; Lim, Miller, Kaambwa, & Koczwara, 2017; Lui, Gallo‐Hershberg, & DeAngelis, 2017; Rucci et al., 2018; Villoria & Lara, 2018; Yung et al., 2018). A large sample size makes it possible to perform psychometric analyses across subgroups, which is important for confirming the general applicability of a measure (McHorney et al., 1994).…”

Reliability and validity of the Hebrew version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire for measuring patients' perceived continuity of care in oral anticancer therapy

“…These dimensions also resemble two major components of the recently published OPortuinity for Treatment In Oncology (OPTION) questionnaire: The personal continuity scale of the NCQ corresponds with the “trustful relationship with healthcare staff” factor in the OPTION questionnaire, while the team/cross‐boundary continuity scale of the NCQ measures patient's perceived continuity between providers, as does the “collaboration among health care professionals” of the OPTION questionnaire (Rucci et al, ).…”

“…This unique setting enabled us to test the NCQ's performance in a context where the continuity of care and collaboration between primary and specialty care are pivotal. Our results are congruent with the original Dutch study as well as with the recently published study that assessed the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the NCQ (NCQ-N)(Hetlevik, Hustoft, Uijen, Aßmus, & Gjesdal, 2017;.In accordance with the original Dutch version, the NCQ-H consists of two scales that measure two distinctive dimensions of continuity of care in OACT (relational or personal, and team/crossboundary), demonstrated by the high correlations between the two "personal continuity with care provider" subscales and the low correlations between "personal continuity with care provider" subscales and the team/cross-boundary scales.These dimensions also resemble two major components of the recently published OPortuinity for Treatment In Oncology (OPTION) questionnaire: The personal continuity scale of the NCQ corresponds with the "trustful relationship with healthcare staff" factor in the OPTION questionnaire, while the team/cross-boundary continuity scale of the NCQ measures patient's perceived continuity between providers, as does the "collaboration among health care professionals" of the OPTION questionnaire(Rucci et al, 2018).…”