{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024932614555256066, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013140161725067386, 'mean_word_length': 5.276955602536998, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Psychometric Properties of the ‘Patients’ Perspective of the Quality of Palliative Care Scale’

Objectives: Palliative care is a basic human right for all patients suffering from progressive and excruciating pain, limitations in daily activities as well as requiring constant care. The development of palliative care is always associated with the physical, psychological, social and spiritual care quality level and requires continuous evaluation by the care-receiving patients. This study aimed to determine the psychometric properties of the patients’ perspective of the quality of palliative care scale. Materials and Methods: This methodological study was conducted on 500 patients with chronic diseases admitted to the hospitals affiliated in Golestan University of Medical Sciences, between 2019 and 2020. Participants were selected through stratified sampling through proportional allocation as well as considering the bed occupancy rate in the two referral hospitals of the university. According to Wild approach, we translated the original version of the scale the patients’ perspectives of the quality of the palliative care scale with 35 items and eight subscales. Using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, the psychometric properties of the scale (i.e., initial reliability and face, content, convergent and construct validities) were assessed. The reliability of the scale was calculated by applying Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, McDonald’s omega coefficient and the Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). SPSS-16 and AMOS-24 software programs were used to analyse the data. Results: Three items were omitted after assessing the initial reliability of the translated version of the perspectives of the quality of the palliative care scale using adjusted Cronbach’s alpha. The qualitative face validity and impact score of the remaining items of the scale were confirmed by the target group. Meanwhile, a panel of experts confirmed the content validity ratio and content validity index. Convergent validity was approved by calculating the average variance extracted >0.5. Performing EFA led to the extraction of 7 subscales with 32 items. CFA and goodness of fit indices such as GFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.048 and GFI = 0.97 confirmed the construct model by omitting three items. Hence, the Persian version of the patient’s perspective of the quality of palliative care scale was finalised, including seven subscales with 29 items. ICC of >0.7 represented good reliability. Moreover, Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega coefficient confirmed the internal consistency of the scale. Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, the Persian version of the patients’ perspective of the quality of palliative care scale is introduced as a valid and reliable scale. It can accurately indicate and predict the meticulous quality of such care in hospitalised patients and can be used in the cure and care assessments in the health system.