A scale to measure satisfaction of bereaved family receiving inpatient palliative care

Abstract

Although satisfaction is an important outcome of medical care, there are no validated tools to quantify family satisfaction with hospital-based palliative care. In this nationwide postal survey, an instrument to measure informal carer satisfaction with an inpatient palliative care service was validated. A 60-item questionnaire was mailed to 1344 bereaved people who had lost their family members at 50 palliative care units in Japan, and 850 responses were analysed (response rate=64%). The reliability, construct validity, and convergent validity of the scale were examined after the responses were randomly divided into two groups: a training set used in the development phase (n=500) and a testing set used in the validation phase (n=350). The number of scale items was reduced from 50 to 34 through psychometric techniques in the development phase. In the testing sample, the overall Cronbach's coefficient alpha for the final 34-item scale was 0.98. A factor analysis revealed that the scale consisted of seven subcategories: Nursing Care, Facility, Information, Availability, Family Care, Cost, and Symptom Palliation. The total score of the scale was significantly correlated with the degree of global satisfaction of the bereaved (Spearman's r=0.78). In conclusion, this 34-item scale, the Satisfaction Scale for Family Members Receiving Inpatient Palliative Care (Sat-Fam-IPC), has acceptable psychometric properties and would be a useful tool to measure carer satisfaction with an inpatient palliative care service.

Keywords

measurement palliative care psychometry satisfaction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lohr KN . Outcome measurement: concepts and questions. Inquiry 1988; 25: 37–50.

Tierney RM , Horton SM , Hannan T , Tierney WM . Relationships between symptom relief, quality of life, and satisfaction with hospice care. Palliat Med 1998; 12: 333–344.

Hearn J , Higginson IJ . Do specialist palliative care teams improve outcomes for cancer patients? A systematic literature review. Palliat Med 1998; 12: 317–332.

Smeenk FWJM , van Haastregt JCM , de Witte LP , Crebolder HFJM . Effectiveness of home care programs for patients with incurable cancer on their quality of life and time spent in hospital: systematic review. Br J Med 1998; 316: 1939–1944.

Wilkinson EK , Salisbury C , Bosanquet N , et al. Patient and carer preference for, and satisfaction with, specialist models of palliative care: a systematic literature review. Palliat Med 1999; 13: 197–216.

Jacoby A , Lecouturier J , Bradshaw C , Lovel T , Eccles M . Feasibility of using postal questionnaires to examine carer satisfaction with palliative care: a methodological assessment. Palliat Med 1999; 13: 285–298.

Kristjanson LJ . Validity and reliability testing of the FAMCARE Scale: measuring family satisfaction with advanced cancer care. Soc Sci Med 1993; 36: 693–701.

McCusker J . Development of scales to measure satisfaction and preferences regarding long-term and terminal care. Med Care 1984; 22: 476–493.

Wales J , Kane R , Robbins S , Bernstein L , Krasnow R . UCLA hospice evaluation study. Methodology and instrumentation. Med Care 1983; 21: 734–744.

10.

Wilkinson HJ . Assessment of patients satisfaction and hospice: a review and an investigation. Hosp J 1986; 2: 69–94.

11.

Hall JA , Dornan MC . What patients like about their medical care and how often they are asked: a meta-analysis of the satisfaction literature. Soc Sci Med 1988; 27: 935–939.

12.

Lewis JR . Patient views on quality care in general practice: literature review. Soc Sci Med 1994; 39: 655–670.

13.

Sitzia J , Wood N . Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med 1997; 45: 1829–1843.

14.

Wensing M , Grol R , Smits A . Quality judgments by patients on general practice care: a literature analysis. Soc Sci Med 1994; 38: 45–53.

15.

Wensing M , Jung HP , Mainz J , Olesen F , Grol R . A systematic review of the literature on patient priorities for general practice care. Part 1: Description of the research domain. Soc Sci Med 1998; 47: 1573–1588.

16.

Bonomi AE , Cella DF , Hahn EA , et al. Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 309–320.

17.

Lasek RJ , Barkley W , Harper DL , Rosenthal GE . An evaluation of the impact of nonresponse bias on patient satisfaction surveys. Med Care 1997; 35: 646–652.

18.

Hall JA , Dornan MC . Meta-analysis of satisfaction with medical care: description of research domain and analysis of overall satisfaction levels. Soc Sci Med 1988; 27: 637–644.

19.

Avis M , Bond M , Arthur A . Satisfying solutions? A review of some unresolved issues in the measurement of patient satisfaction. J Adv Nurs 1995; 22: 316–322.

20.

Hays RD , Ware JE . My medical care is better than yours. Social desirability and patient satisfaction ratings. Med Care 1986; 24: 519–525.

21.

Linder-Pelz S . Social psychological determinants of patient satisfaction: a test of five hypotheses. Soc Sci Med 1982; 16: 583–589.