The Patient Satisfaction with Pharmacist Services Questionnaire (PSPSQ 2.0): translation and validation study of the Urdu version

Fahad, Mohammad; Iqbal, Qaiser; Haider, Sajjad; Khalid, Adnan; Hassali, Mohamed Azmi; Saleem, Fahad

doi:10.1590/s2175-97902020000419008

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article • Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 57 • 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/s2175-97902020000419008 copy

The Patient Satisfaction with Pharmacist Services Questionnaire (PSPSQ 2.0): translation and validation study of the Urdu version

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

The study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the Urdu version of Patient Satisfaction with Pharmacist Services Questionnaire (PSPSQ 2.0). We applied the forward-backward procedure to translate the PSPSQ 2.0 in the Urdu language. The test-retest reliability was assessed through Cronbach’s alpha reliability analysis. The validity of the translated PSPSQ 2.0 was constructed by using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) through principal axis factoring extraction and Oblique rotation with Kaiser Normalization onto 2 predetermined factors. The Quality of Care (QOC) construct exhibited Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.900 (Test) and α = 0.871 (Retest) at two-time points. The Interpersonal Relationship (IPR) Construct had alpha values of 0.845 (Test) and α = 0.819 (Retest). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy for the factor analysis was 0.899. Barlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant (Chi-square = 1192.72; p < 0.05) revealing relationships of the data and suitability of CFA. Two factors explaining the total variance of 40% were extracted whereby loading values were acceptable (> 0.50) for all items of the translated version of PSPSQ 2.0. Results of this study conclude that the translated version of PSPSQ 2.0 is a valid instrument in regions where Urdu is a prime language of communication

Keywords:
satisfaction.Pharmacist services.Translation and validation study; Urdu

Characteristics	Frequency	Percentage
Age (years)
18-27	12	40.0
28-37	18	60.0
Gender
Male	24	80.0
Female	6	20.0
Educational Level
Intermediate	5	83.3
Bachelors	25	16.7
Income level (Pakistan rupees; Pk Rs)*
10,000 - 25000	21	70.0
25001 - 50000	9	30.0
Locality
Urban	20	66.6
Rural	10	33.4

Constructs in PSPSQ 2.0	Number of items	Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient (based on standardized items)
Constructs in PSPSQ 2.0	Number of items	Test (Week 1) N = 30	Retest (Week 2) N = 30
Quality of care (QOC)	10	0.900	0.871
Interpersonal Relationship (IPR)	6	0.845	0.819
Pooled (all 16 items)	16	0.900	0.890

Survey items	Code	Intraclass Correlation Coefficient*	95% Confidence Interval	p-value
QOC1_The pharmacist fully addressed the main health reason/concerns/issues during my visit.	ICC[1,1]	0.864	0.728-0.910	< 0.05
QOC2_The pharmacist was professional in all of our interactions.	ICC[1,1]	0.863	0.700-0.910	< 0.05
QOC3_The pharmacist explained information to me in a manner that I could understand.	ICC[1,1]	0.822	0.799-0.900	< 0.05
QOC4_The pharmacist checked to see if I understood all the information.	ICC[1,1]	0.899	0.844-0.912	< 0.05
QOC5_The pharmacist spent as much time necessary to help me with my questions and concerns.	ICC[1,1]	0.922	0.700-0.909	< 0.05
QOC6_The pharmacist made sure I understood how important it is to follow the drug regimen.	ICC[1,1]	0.855	0.824-0.923	< 0.05
QOC7_The pharmacist provided useful recommendations on how to take my medications.	ICC[1,1]	0.811	0.877-0.942	< 0.05
QOC8_The pharmacist provided useful recommendations about managing my overall health (e.g. diet, exercise).	ICC[1,1]	0.869	0.799-0.901	< 0.05
QOC9_The pharmacist worked with me to manage my medication related issues (e.g. cost, side effects of drugs).	ICC[1,1]	0.848	0.711-0.920	< 0.05
QOC10_The pharmacist followed up on my progress in a timely manner.	ICC[1,1]	0.922	0.811-0.944	< 0.05
IPR1_The pharmacist was caring and kind in dealing with my health issues.	ICC[1,1]	0.867	0.713-0.920	< 0.05
IPR2_The pharmacist encouraged me to achieve my treatment goals.	ICC[1,1]	0.933	0.872-0.950	< 0.05
IPR3_I felt comfortable in my interactions with the pharmacist.	ICC[1,1]	0.899	0.733-0.925	< 0.05
IPR4_The pharmacist was respectful to me during our interactions.	ICC[1,1]	0.821	0.822-0.949	< 0.05
IPR5_The pharmacist was committed to improving my health.	ICC[1,1]	0.890	0.789-0.919	< 0.05
IPR6_ could trust the information that the pharmacist provided.	ICC[1,1]	0.821	0.812-0.911	< 0.05

Characteristics	Frequency	Percentage
Age (years)
18-27	18	17.3
28-37	47	45.1
38-47	20	19.2
> 47	19	18.2
Gender
Male	78	75.0
Female	26	25.0
Educational Level
Matriculation	15	14,4
Intermediate	33	31.7
Bachelors	56	53.8
Income level (Pakistan rupees; Pk Rs)*
10,000 - 25000	20	19.2
25001 - 50000	69	66.3
> 50000	15	14.4
Locality
Urban	89	85.5
Rural	15	14.4

Construct	Number of items	Cronbach Alpha Coefficient
Quality of Care (QOC)	10	0.899
Interpersonal Relationship (IPR)	6	0.812
Total items in questionnaire (pooled)	16	0.872

Survey items	Factor Matrix^a		Structure Matrix		Pattern Matrix^b		Communalities
	Factor Loading		Factor Loading		Factor Loading		Extraction
	QOC	IPR	QOC	IPR	QOC	IPR	Extraction
QOC1_The pharmacist fully addressed the main health reason/concerns/issues during my visit.	0.722	0.211	0.500	0.639	0.448	0.433	0.617
QOC2_The pharmacist was professional in all of our interactions.	0.699	0.050	0.629	0.501	0.591	0.398	0.549
QOC3_The pharmacist explained information to me in a manner that I could understand.	0.521	-0.300	0.588	0.100	0.695	0.311	0.577
QOC4_The pharmacist checked to see if I understood all the information.	0.601	-0.277	0.766	0.437	0.766	-0.011	0.591
QOC5_The pharmacist spent as much time necessary to help me with my questions and concerns.	0.699	-0.309	0.782	0.211	0.799	-0.201	0.688
QOC6_The pharmacist made sure I understood how important it is to follow the drug regimen.	0.799	-0.376	0.800	0.299	0.891	-0.088	0.700
QOC7_The pharmacist provided useful recommendations on how to take my medications.	0.701	-0.201	0.710	0.515	0.599	0.209	0.563
QOC8_The pharmacist provided useful recommendations about managing my overall health (e.g. diet, exercise).	0.766	0.107	0.600	0.609	0.409	0.671	0.599
QOC9_The pharmacist worked with me to manage my medication related issues (e.g. cost, side effects of drugs).	0.792	0.078	0.665	0.655	0.511	0.566	0.644
QOC10_The pharmacist followed up on my progress in a timely manner.	0.755	0.080	0.607	0.599	0.491	0.511	0.601
IPR1_The pharmacist was caring and kind in dealing with my health issues.	0.500	0.600	0.300	0.813	0.189	0.811	0.899
IPR2_The pharmacist encouraged me to achieve my treatment goals.	0.661	0.498	0.612	0.771	0.452	0.533	0.761
IPR3_I felt comfortable in my interactions with the pharmacist.	0.566	0.512	0.377	0.693	0.099	0.701	0.619
IPR4_The pharmacist was respectful to me during our interactions.	0.512	0.055	0.301	0.692	0.361	0.404	0.503
IPR5_The pharmacist was committed to improving my health.	0.600	0.231	0.605	0.799	0.677	0.477	0.761
IPR6_I could trust the information that the pharmacist provided.	0.587	0.400	0.296	0.690	0.051	0.699	0.507

Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes, n. 580, 05508-000 S. Paulo/SP Brasil, Tel.: (55 11) 3091-3824 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: bjps@usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Correspondence:
F. Saleem. Faculty of Pharmacy and Health Sciences. University of Balochistan. Quetta, Balochistan Pakistan. Phone: 00923458326545. Email: fahaduob@gmail.com.