Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The EORTC cancer in-patient satisfaction with care questionnaire: EORTC IN-PATSAT32

Validation study for Spanish patients

  • Research Articles
  • Published:
Clinical and Translational Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The EORTC Quality of Life (QL) Group has developed a questionnaire (the EORTC IN-PATSAT32) to assess the satisfaction of cancer inpatients with hospital-based care. In this study we assess the psychometric properties of the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 applied to a sample of Spanish patients.

Materials and methods

Eighty cancer patients with different tumour sites completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaires. Psychometric evaluation of the structure, reliability and validity was conducted.

Results

Multitrait scaling analysis showed that most itemscale correlation coefficients met the standards of convergent and discriminant validity. Cronbach’s coefficients were good (0.77–0.97) for all scales except hospital access. Correlations between the scales and single items of the QLQ-C30 and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were generally low. Correlations between the Oberst scales and an item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward to others with the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 were moderate. Patients with higher scores on the Oberst scales and the item on intention to recommend the hospital or ward showed higher satisfaction with care levels in all EORTC IN-PATSAT32 areas but one.

Conclusions

The EORTC IN-PATSAT32 appears to be a reliable and valid instrument when applied to a sample of Spanish cancer patients. These results are in line with those of the EORTC validation study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Poinsot R, Altmeyer A, Conroy T et al (2006) Multisite validation study of questionnaire assessing out-patient satisfaction with care questionnaire in ambulatory chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment. Bull Cancer 93:315–327

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brédart A, Mignot V, Rousseau A et al (2004) Validation of the EORTC QLQ-SAT32 cancer inpatient satisfaction questionnaire by self- versus interview-assessment comparison. Patient Educ Couns 54:207–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lubeck DP, Litwin MS, Henning JM et al (2000) An instrument to measure patient satisfaction with healthcare in an observational database: results of a validation study using data from CaPSURE. Am J Manag Care 6:70–76

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ware JE, Snyder MK, Wright WR, Davies AR (1983) Defining and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care. Eval Prog Plann 6:247–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wong WS, Fielding R, Wong CM, Hedley AJ (2008) Psychometric properties of the Nine-Item Chinese Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (ChPSQ-9) in Chinese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Psych Oncol 17:292–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aaronson NK, Ahmezdai S, Bergman B et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a Quality of Life instrument for use in intentional clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Aaronson NK, Cull A, Kaasa S, Sprangers M (1994) The EORTC modular approach to Quality of Life assessment in Oncology. Int J Ment Health 23:75–96

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sprangers MA, Cull A, Groenvold M et al (1998) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group. Qual Life Res 7:291–300

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brédart A, Razavi D, Delvaux N et al (1998) A comprehensive assessment of satisfaction with care for cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 6:518–523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Brédart A, Bottomley A, Blazeby JM et al (2005) An international prospective study of the EORTC cancer in-patient satisfaction with care measure (EORTC IN-PATSAT32). Eur J Cancer 41:2120–2131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oberst MT (1984) Patients’ perceptions of care, measurement of quality and satisfaction. Cancer 53:2366–2375

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wiggers JH, Donovan KO, Redman S, Sanson-Fisher RW (1990) Cancer patient satisfaction with care. Cancer 66:610–616

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Loblaw DA, Bezjak A, Bunston T (1999) Development and testing of a visit-specific patient satisfaction questionnaire: the Princess Margaret Hospital Satisfaction with Doctor Questionnaire. J Clin Oncol 17:1931–1938

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Loblaw DA, Bezjak A, Singh PM et al (2004) Psychometric refinement of an outpatient, visit-specific satisfaction with doctor questionnaire. Psych Oncol 13:223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Defossez G, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Ingrand I et al (2007) Satisfaction with care among patients with non-metastatic breast cancer development and first steps of validation of the REPERES-60 questionnaire. BMC Cancer 7:129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yun YH, Kim SH, Lee KM et al (2006) Patient-reported assessment of quality care at end of life: development and validation of Quality Care Questionnaire-End of Life (QCQ-EOL). Eur J Cancer 42:2310–2317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Radwin L, Alster K, Rubin KM (2003) Development and testing of the Oncology Patients’ Perceptions of the Quality of Nursing Care Scale. Oncol Nurs Forum 30:283–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Abetz L, Coombs JH, Keininger DL et al (2005) Development of the cancer therapy satisfaction questionnaire: item generation and content validity testing. Value Health 8[Suppl 1]:S41–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bjordal K, de Graeff A, Fayers PM et al (2000) A 12 country field study of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and the head and neck cancer specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in head and neck patients. Eur J Cancer 36:1796–1807

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Arraras JI, Arias F, Tejedor M et al (2002) The EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) quality of life questionnaire. Validation study for Spain with head and neck cancer patients. Psych Oncol 11:249–256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Arraras JI, Villafranca E, Arias F et al (2008) The EORTC Quality of life questionnaire OLO-C30 (version 3.0). Validation study for Spanish prostate cancer patients. Arch Esp Urol 61:949–954

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cull A, Sprangers M, Bjordal K et al (2002) EORTC Quality of Life Group translation procedure, 2nd Edn. EORTC, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  24. Karnofsky DA, Burchenal JH (1948) The clinical evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer. In: McLeod CM (ed) Evaluation of chemotherapeutic agents. Colombia University, New York, pp 199–205

    Google Scholar 

  25. National Cancer Institute (1998) NCI Common toxicity criteria. National Cancer Institute, New York. http://ctep.cancer.gov/reporting/ctc_archive.html

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ware JE, Harris WJ, Gandek B et al (1997) MAP-R for windows: multitrait multi-item analysis program — revised user’s guide. Health Assessment Lab, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Jayasekara H, Rajapaksa L, Bredart A (2008) Psychometric evaluation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer in-patient satisfaction with care questionnaire (’sinhalar’ version) for use in a South-Asian setting. Int J Qual Health Care 20:22122–22126

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital of Navarre, C/ Irunlarrea, 3, ES-31008, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain

    Juan Ignacio Arraras, Ruth Vera, Maite Martínez, Berta Hernández & Nuria Laínez

  2. Radiotherapeutic Oncology Department, Hospital of Navarre, C/ Irunlarrea, 3, ES-31008, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain

    Juan Ignacio Arraras, Mikel Rico, Meritxell Vila, Volker Chicata & Gemma Asín

  3. C/ Monasterio de Urdax, 1 - 5.° D, ES-31007, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain

    Juan Ignacio Arraras

Authors
  1. Juan Ignacio Arraras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruth Vera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maite Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Berta Hernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nuria Laínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mikel Rico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  7. Meritxell Vila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  8. Volker Chicata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  9. Gemma Asín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Ignacio Arraras.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arraras, J.I., Vera, R., Martínez, M. et al. The EORTC cancer in-patient satisfaction with care questionnaire: EORTC IN-PATSAT32. Clin Transl Oncol 11, 237–242 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0346-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0346-6

Keywords