Cargando…

Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire

BACKGROUND: Patients have about seven medical consultations a year. Despite the importance of medical interviews in the healthcare process, there is no generic instrument to assess patients’ experiences in general practices, medical specialties, and surgical specialties. The main objective was to va...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maurice-Szamburski, Axel, Michel, Pierre, Loundou, Anderson, Auquier, Pascal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5310066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28196503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0608-x
_version_ 1782507812927045632
author Maurice-Szamburski, Axel
Michel, Pierre
Loundou, Anderson
Auquier, Pascal
author_facet Maurice-Szamburski, Axel
Michel, Pierre
Loundou, Anderson
Auquier, Pascal
author_sort Maurice-Szamburski, Axel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patients have about seven medical consultations a year. Despite the importance of medical interviews in the healthcare process, there is no generic instrument to assess patients’ experiences in general practices, medical specialties, and surgical specialties. The main objective was to validate a questionnaire assessing patients’ experiences with medical consultations in various practices. METHOD: The G-MISS study was a prospective multi-center trial that enrolled patients from May to July 2016. A total of 2055 patients were included from general practices, medical specialties, and surgical specialties. Patients filled out a questionnaire assessing various aspects of their experience and satisfaction within 1 week after their medical interview. The validation process relied on item response theory. Internal validity was examined using exploratory factorial analysis. The statistical model used the root mean square error of approximation, confirmatory fit index, and standard root mean square residual as fit indices. Scalability and reliability were assessed with the Rasch model and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, respectively. Scale properties across the three subgroups were explored with differential item functioning. RESULTS: The G-MISS final questionnaire contained 16 items, structured in three dimensions of patients’ experiences: “Relief”, “Communication”, and “Compliance”. A global index of patients’ experiences was computed as the mean of the dimension scores. All fit indices from the statistical model were satisfactory (RMSEA = 0.03, CFI = 0.98, SRMR = 0.06). The overall scalability had a good fit to the Rasch model. Each dimension was reliable, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.73 to 0.86. Differential item functioning across the three consultation settings was negligible. Patients undergoing medical or surgical specialties reported higher scores in the “Relief” dimension compared with general practice (83.0 ± 11.6 or 82.4 ± 11.6 vs. 73.2 ± 16.7; P < .001). A consultation shorter than 5 min correlated with low patient satisfaction in “Relief” and “Communication” and in the global index, P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The G-MISS questionnaire is a valid and reliable questionnaire for assessing patients’ experiences after consultations with general practitioners, medical specialists, and surgical specialists. The multidimensional structure relies on item response theory and assesses different aspects of patients’ experiences that could be useful in clinical practice and research settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5310066
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53100662017-03-13 Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire Maurice-Szamburski, Axel Michel, Pierre Loundou, Anderson Auquier, Pascal Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Patients have about seven medical consultations a year. Despite the importance of medical interviews in the healthcare process, there is no generic instrument to assess patients’ experiences in general practices, medical specialties, and surgical specialties. The main objective was to validate a questionnaire assessing patients’ experiences with medical consultations in various practices. METHOD: The G-MISS study was a prospective multi-center trial that enrolled patients from May to July 2016. A total of 2055 patients were included from general practices, medical specialties, and surgical specialties. Patients filled out a questionnaire assessing various aspects of their experience and satisfaction within 1 week after their medical interview. The validation process relied on item response theory. Internal validity was examined using exploratory factorial analysis. The statistical model used the root mean square error of approximation, confirmatory fit index, and standard root mean square residual as fit indices. Scalability and reliability were assessed with the Rasch model and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, respectively. Scale properties across the three subgroups were explored with differential item functioning. RESULTS: The G-MISS final questionnaire contained 16 items, structured in three dimensions of patients’ experiences: “Relief”, “Communication”, and “Compliance”. A global index of patients’ experiences was computed as the mean of the dimension scores. All fit indices from the statistical model were satisfactory (RMSEA = 0.03, CFI = 0.98, SRMR = 0.06). The overall scalability had a good fit to the Rasch model. Each dimension was reliable, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.73 to 0.86. Differential item functioning across the three consultation settings was negligible. Patients undergoing medical or surgical specialties reported higher scores in the “Relief” dimension compared with general practice (83.0 ± 11.6 or 82.4 ± 11.6 vs. 73.2 ± 16.7; P < .001). A consultation shorter than 5 min correlated with low patient satisfaction in “Relief” and “Communication” and in the global index, P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The G-MISS questionnaire is a valid and reliable questionnaire for assessing patients’ experiences after consultations with general practitioners, medical specialists, and surgical specialists. The multidimensional structure relies on item response theory and assesses different aspects of patients’ experiences that could be useful in clinical practice and research settings. BioMed Central 2017-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5310066/ /pubmed/28196503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0608-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Maurice-Szamburski, Axel
Michel, Pierre
Loundou, Anderson
Auquier, Pascal
Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title_full Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title_fullStr Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title_short Validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the G-MISS questionnaire
title_sort validation of the generic medical interview satisfaction scale: the g-miss questionnaire
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5310066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28196503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0608-x
work_keys_str_mv AT mauriceszamburskiaxel validationofthegenericmedicalinterviewsatisfactionscalethegmissquestionnaire
AT michelpierre validationofthegenericmedicalinterviewsatisfactionscalethegmissquestionnaire
AT loundouanderson validationofthegenericmedicalinterviewsatisfactionscalethegmissquestionnaire
AT auquierpascal validationofthegenericmedicalinterviewsatisfactionscalethegmissquestionnaire
AT validationofthegenericmedicalinterviewsatisfactionscalethegmissquestionnaire