Evaluation properties of the French version of the OUT-PATSAT35 satisfaction with care questionnaire according to classical and item response theory analyses
- First Online:
- 203 Downloads
The present study investigates the properties of the French version of the OUT-PATSAT35 questionnaire, which evaluates the outpatients’ satisfaction with care in oncology using classical analysis (CTT) and item response theory (IRT).
This cross-sectional multicenter study includes 692 patients who completed the questionnaire at the end of their ambulatory treatment. CTT analyses tested the main psychometric properties (convergent and divergent validity, and internal consistency). IRT analyses were conducted separately for each OUT-PATSAT35 domain (the doctors, the nurses or the radiation therapists and the services/organization) by models from the Rasch family. We examined the fit of the data to the model expectations and tested whether the model assumptions of unidimensionality, monotonicity and local independence were respected.
A total of 605 (87.4 %) respondents were analyzed with a mean age of 64 years (range 29–88). Internal consistency for all scales separately and for the three main domains was good (Cronbach’s α 0.74–0.98). IRT analyses were performed with the partial credit model. No disordered thresholds of polytomous items were found. Each domain showed high reliability but fitted poorly to the Rasch models. Three items in particular, the item about “promptness” in the doctors’ domain and the items about “accessibility” and “environment” in the services/organization domain, presented the highest default of fit. A correct fit of the Rasch model can be obtained by dropping these items. Most of the local dependence concerned items about “information provided” in each domain. A major deviation of unidimensionality was found in the nurses’ domain.
CTT showed good psychometric properties of the OUT-PATSAT35. However, the Rasch analysis revealed some misfitting and redundant items. Taking the above problems into consideration, it could be interesting to refine the questionnaire in a future study.
KeywordsSatisfaction with care OUT-PATSAT35 questionnaire Cancer Item response theory Classical test theory
Akaike information criterion
Classical test theory
Differential item functioning
Exploratory factor analysis
European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer
Health-related quality of life
Item response theory
Principal component analysis
Partial credit model
Satisfaction with care
Rating scale model
- 3.Borras, J. M., Sanchez-Hernandez, A., Navarro, M., Martinez, M., Mendez, E., Ponton, J. L., et al. (2001). Compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer receiving home chemotherapy or outpatient treatment: A randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 322(7290), 826.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Poinsot, R., Altmeyer, A., Conroy, T., Savignoni, A., Asselain, B., Leonard, I., et al. (2006). Multisite validation study of questionnaire assessing out-patient satisfaction with care questionnaire in ambulatory chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment. Bulletin du Cancer, 93(3), 315–327.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Arraras, J. I., Illarramendi, J. J., Viudez, A., Lecumberri, M. J., de la Cruz, S., Hernandez, B., et al. (2012). The cancer outpatient satisfaction with care questionnaire for chemotherapy, OUT-PATSAT35 CT: A validation study for Spanish patients. Supportive Care in Cancer, 20(12), 3269–3278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Arraras, J. I., Rico, M., Vila, M., Chicata, V., Asin, G., Martinez, M., et al. (2010). The EORTC cancer outpatient satisfaction with care questionnaire in ambulatory radiotherapy: EORTC OUT-PATSAT35 RT. Validation study for Spanish patients. Psychooncology, 19(6), 657–664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Nunnally, J. C. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- 14.De Ayala, R. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 16.Rasch, G. (1993). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. ERIC.Google Scholar
- 25.Sijtsma, K., & Molenaar, I. W. (Eds.). (2002). Introduction to nonparametric item response theory (Vol. 5). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
- 26.Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2013). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- 31.Linacre, J., & Wright, B. (1994). Chi square fit statistics. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(2), 350.Google Scholar
- 32.Linacre, J. M. (2003). Rasch power analysis: Size vs. significance: Standardized chi square fit statistic. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 17, 918.Google Scholar
- 33.Sheridan, B. (1998). RUMM item analysis package: Rasch unidimensional measurement model. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 11(4), 599.Google Scholar