Patient-centered care and geriatric knowledge translation among healthcare providers in Vietnam: translation and validation of the patient-centered care measure

BACKGROUND: People are living longer, and the majority of aging people reside in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, inappropriate healthcare contributes to health disparities between populations of aging people and leads to care dependency and social isolation. Tools to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions for geriatric care in LMICs are limited. The aim of this study was to provide a validated and culturally relevant instrument to assess patient-centered care in Vietnam, where the population of aging people is growing rapidly. METHODS: The Patient-Centered Care (PCC) measure was translated from English to Vietnamese using forward-backward method. The PCC measure grouped activities into sub-domains of holistic, collaborative, and responsive care. A bilingual expert panel rated the cross-cultural relevance and translation equivalence of the instrument. We calculated Content Validity Indexing (CVI) scores at both the item (I-CVI) and scale (S-CVI/Ave) levels to evaluate the relevance of the Vietnamese PCC (VPCC) measure to geriatric care in the Vietnamese context. We piloted the translated instrument VPCC measure with 112 healthcare providers in Hanoi, Vietnam. Multiple logistic regression models were specified to test the a priori null hypothesis that geriatric knowledge is not different among healthcare providers with perception of high implementation compared with low implementation of PCC measures. RESULTS: On the item level, all 20 questions had excellent validity ratings. The VPCC had excellent content validity (S-CVI/Ave of 0.96) and translation equivalence (TS- CVI/Ave of 0.94). In the pilot study, the highest-rated PCC elements were the holistic provision of information and collaborative care, while the lowest-rated elements were the holistic attendance to patients’ needs and responsive care. Attention to the psychosocial needs of aging people and poor coordination of care within and beyond the health system were the lowest-rated PCC activities. After controlling for healthcare provider characteristics, the odds of the perception of high implementation of collaborative care were increased by 21% for each increase in geriatric knowledge score. We fail to reject the null hypotheses for holistic care, responsive care and PCC. CONCLUSION: The VPCC is a validated instrument that may be utilized to systemically evaluate the practice of patient-centered geriatric care in Vietnam.