Reproducibility and Validity of the Picker Patient Experience (26-Item Version) in Research participants in Medellin, Colombia, in 2018

Authors

  • Erika Andrea Gallego Álvarez CES university
  • Juliana Castillo Gutiérrez CES university
  • Jaiberth Antonio Cardona Arias University of Antioquia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7101-929X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfnsp.v38n1e338423

Keywords:

health services, quality of health care, health services research, patient care, patient satisfaction, psychometry, 26-item Picker Patient Experience, Colombia

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the reproducibility and validity of the 26-item Picker Patient Experience, in research participants of a high complexity institution in Medellin, Colombia, in 2018. Methodology: Psychometric evaluation in 241 subjects, through reliability with Cronbach's alpha, internal consistency with Spearman correlations, appearance, content and predictive validity with factor analysis. Results: Over 90% of articipants positively rated the clarity of the information, relationship with care staff and care. Cronbach's alpha was 0.70 (confidence interval - CI - 95% = 0.64-0.76); the correlations in internal consistency were greater than 0.30
in half of the items; in the content validity, the success rate was greater than 90%; predictive validity was moderate, with a proportion of variance explained of 55%. On a scale of zero (worst result) to one hundred (best), 50% of the central values of the Picker Patient Experience ranged between 80.8 and 92.3, with a range between 62 and 98, demonstrating the excellent perception of quality in the study group, with no statistical
differences according to age, number of children, schooling, socioeconomic status of housing, marital status, or occupation. The only statistical association was found with sex, the median score being lower in women (Me = 85; interquartile range —IR— = 81-92) compared to men (Me = 87; IR = 83- 94). Conclusion: There is a reproducible, valid and useful scale for the perception of quality in research with 26 items, corresponding to a modification of the Spanish version of the 33-item Picker Patient Experience. This is of great relevance,
considering that the quality of care requires the inclusion of the patient's perspective with psychometrically robust constructs.
 
|Abstract
= 553 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 217 veces| | HTML (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 31 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Erika Andrea Gallego Álvarez, CES university

Nurse, MSc in Quality in Health. School of Medicine, CES University, Medellin, Colombia.

Juliana Castillo Gutiérrez, CES university

Nurse, MSc in Quality in Health. School of Medicine, CES University, Medellin, Colombia.

Jaiberth Antonio Cardona Arias, University of Antioquia

Microbiologist and Bioanalyst, MSc Epidemiology, MSc Applied Economics, PhD (student) Public Health. University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.

References

(1). Peyrot M, Cooper PD, Schnapf D. The Great Gap. Consumer satisfaction and perceived quality of outpatient health services. J Health Care Mark. 1993;13(1):24-33.

(2). Bowers MR, Swan JE, Koehler WF. What attributes determine quality and satisfaction with health care delivery? Health Care Manage Rev. 1994;19(4):49-55.

(3). Castro CS, Moreno CR, Paredes HD. Calidad del cuidado de enfermería y grado de satisfacción del usuario externo del Centro de Salud San Juan, año 2016 [tesis de licenciatura]. [Iquitos]: Universidad Nacional de la Amazonía Peruana [internet]; 2016 [citado 2019 nov. 12]. Disponible en: http://repositorio. unapiquitos.edu.pe/handle/UNAP/4461.

(4). Lam SSK. servqual: A tool for measuring patients’ opinions of hospital service quality in Hong Kong. Total Qual Manag. 1997;8(4):145-52. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0954412979587.

(5). Donabedian A. La investigación sobre la calidad de la atención médica. Salud Pública Méx. 2014;28(3):324-7.

(6). Colombia, Congreso de la República. Ley 100, por la cual se crea el sistema de seguridad social integral y se dictan otras disposiciones (1993 dic. 23).

(7). Torres C, Páez A, Rincón L, et al. Reproducibilidad del cuestionario: calidad de cuidados de enfermería en pacientes hospitalizados. Rev. Cuid. 2016;7(2):1338-44. doi: https://doi. org/10.15649/cuidarte.v7i2.339.

(8). Cabrera G, Londoño J, Bello L. Validación de un instrumento para medir calidad percibida por usuarios de hospitales de Colombia. Rev. Salud Pública. 2008;10(3):443-51.

(9). Barrio I, Simón P, Sánchez C, et al. Adaptación transcultural y validación del Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire-15 para su uso en población española. Rev Calid Asist. 2009;24(5):192-206.

(10). Mogollones DP, Santana DB, Volke KA. Patient Experience: una nueva mirada para la calidad en salud. [tesis de licenciatura]. [Valdivia]: Facultad de Medicina Universidad Austral de Chile [internet]; 2014 [citado 2019 nov. 12]. Disponible en: http:// cybertesis.uach.cl/tesis/uach/2014/fmm696p/doc/fmm696p.pdf.

(11). Zavala S, Alfaro-Mantilla J. Ética e investigación. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Pública. 2011;28(4):664-9.

(12). National Health Service (nhs), National Quality Board (nqb). Guidance Patient Experience Framework. United Kingdom: nhs. 2012.

(13). Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S, et al. Patients’ experiences and satisfaction with health care: Results of a questionnaire study of specific aspects of care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11(4):335-9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qhc.11.4.335

(14). Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Bruster S. The Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire: Development and validation using data from in-patient surveys in five countries. Int J Qual Heal Care. 2002;14(5):353-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/14.5.353.

(15). Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Gyll R, et al. Measuring the experiences of health care for patients with musculoskeletal disorders (msd): development of the Picker msd questionnaire. Scand J Caring Sci. 2002;16(3):329-33. doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471- 6712.2002.00088.x.

(16). Asociación Médica Mundial (amm). Declaración de Helsinki de la amm – Principios éticos para las investigaciones médicas en seres humanos. [internet]; 2013 [citado 2019 nov. 12]. Disponible en: https://www.wma.net/es/policies-post/declaracion-de-helsinki-de-la-amm-principios-eticos-para-las-investigaciones-medicas-en-seres-humanos/.

(17). Colombia, Ministerio de Salud. Resolución 8430, por la cual se establecen las normas científicas, técnicas y administrativas para la investigación en salud (1993 oct. 4).

(18). Kerlinger F. Investigación del comportamiento (2.a ed.). México: McGraw-Hill; 1988.

(19). Vet H de, Terwee B, Mokkink L. Measurement in Medicine: A Practical Guide. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2001.

(20). Pérez-Gil JA, Moscoso SC, Rodríguez RM. Validez de constructo: el uso de análisis factorial exploratorio-confirmatorio para obtener evidencias de validez. Psicothema. 2000;12(2):442-6.

(21). Segall A, Roberts LW. A comparative analysis of physician estimates and levels of medical knowledge among patients. Sociol Heal Illn. 1980;2(3):317-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467- 9566.ep11340704.

(22). Alonso R, Blanco M, Gayoso P. Validación de un cuestionario de calidad de cuidados de enfermería. Rev. Calid Asist. 2005;20(5):246-50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1134- 282X(05)75092-2.

(23). Silva-Fhon J, Ramón-Cordova S, Vergaray-Villanueva S, et al. Percepción del paciente hospitalizado respecto a la atención de enfermería en un hospital público. Enfermería Univ. 2015;12(2):80-87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. reu.2015.04.001.

(24). Mira J, Aranaz J, Rodriguez J, et al. Servqhos: un cuestionario para evaluar la calidad percibida de la asistencia hospitalaria. Med Prev. 1998;4:12-18.

(25). Granado S, Rodríguez C, Olmedo M, et al. Diseño y validación de un cuestionario para evaluar la satisfacción de los pacientes atendidos en las consultas externas de un hospital de Madrid en 2006. Rev Esp Salud Pública. 2007;81(6):637-45.

(26). García Fernández FP, Pancorbo Hidalgo PL, Carmen Rodríguez Torres M Del, et al. Construcción y validación de un cuestionario para valorar la satisfacción de los usuarios de cirugía mayor ambulatoria. Enferm Clín. 2001;11(4):146-54. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/S1130-8621(01)73708-4.

(27). Donabedian A. Quality assurance in our health care system. Qual Assur Util Rev. 1986;1(1):6-12. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/0885713x8600100104.

(28). Duque Oliva EJ. Revisión del concepto de calidad del servicio y sus modelos de medición. Innovar. 2005;15(25):64-80.

Downloads

Published

2020-02-13

How to Cite

1.
Gallego Álvarez EA, Castillo Gutiérrez J, Cardona Arias JA. Reproducibility and Validity of the Picker Patient Experience (26-Item Version) in Research participants in Medellin, Colombia, in 2018. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [Internet]. 2020 Feb. 13 [cited 2025 Jan. 30];38(1):1-9. Available from: https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/fnsp/article/view/338423

Issue

Vol. 38 No. 1 (2020): Enero-Abril

Section

Servicios de salud

License

Copyright (c) 2020 Facultad Nacional de Salud Pública

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The contents of the articles are the responsibility of the authors

The editorial committee has editorial independence from the National School of Public Health "Héctor Abad Gómez" of the University of Antioquia.

The editorial committee is not responsible for aspects related to copying, plagiarism or fraud that may appear in the articles published in it.

When you are going to reproduce and disclose photographs or personal data in printed or digital format, informed consent is required. Therefore, this requirement is required of the author at the time of receipt of the manuscript.

Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by reproduction rights.

The authors preserve the moral rights and assign the economic rights that will correspond to the University of Antioquia, to publish it, distribute electronic copies, include them in indexing services, directories or national and international databases in Open Access, under the Creative Commons Attribution license -Not Commercial-Share Equal 4.0 International Commercial (CC BY-NC-SA) which allows others to distribute, remix, retouch, and create from the work in a non-commercial way, as long as the respective credit and license are granted. new creations under the same conditions.

The authors will sign the declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.

The editorial committee reserves the right to reject the articles whose authors do not offer satisfactory explanations about the contribution of each author, to meet the criteria of authorship in the submission letter. All authors must meet the four criteria of authorship according to ICMJE: "a) .- That there is a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the article or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data. b) That they have participated in the design of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content. c) .- That has been intervened in the approval of the final version that will be published.d). That they have the capacity to respond to all aspects of the article in order to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are adequately investigated and resolved. "

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC