IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i20p13486-d946114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation and Translation of the Relational Aspect of Care Questionnaire into the Malay Language (RAC-QM) to Evaluate the Compassionate Care Level of Healthcare Workers from the Patient’s Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Noorhidayu Monyati Mohamed Noor

    (Department of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia)

  • Mohd Ismail Ibrahim

    (Department of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia)

  • Suhaily Mohd Hairon

    (Department of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia)

  • Maizun Mohd Zain

    (Public Health Unit, Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II, Kota Bharu 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia)

  • Mohd Saiful Nazri Satiman

    (Medical Division, Kelantan State Health Department, Kota Bharu 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia)

Abstract

Background: Compassionate care has been increasingly highlighted in the past few decades worldwide, including in Malaysia. Despite acknowledging its importance, Malaysia still lacks a validated tool that can be used to assess the level of compassionate care from the patient’s perspective. Therefore, this study aims to validate and translate the Relational Aspect of Care Questionnaire (RAC-Q) into the Malay language. Methods: Permission to use and translate the original RAC-Q into the Malay language was obtained. The RAC-Q was then translated into the Malay language following the 10 steps proposed for the translation of a patient-reported outcome questionnaire. A pretest was conducted based on 30 inpatients to assess the appropriateness and clarity of the finalized translated questionnaire. A cross-sectional study was performed based on 138 inpatients from six adult wards of a teaching hospital so as to validate the translated questionnaire. The data were analyzed using R software version 4.1.3 (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria, 2020). The results were presented descriptively as numbers and percentages or means and standard deviations. A confirmatory factor analysis was performed using robust estimators. Results: The analysis showed that the measurement model of the RAC-Q Malay version (RAC-QM) fits well based on several fit indices: a standardized factor loading range from 0.40 to 0.73, comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.917, Tucker–Lewis fit index (TLI) of 0.904, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.06, and a standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) of 0.073. It has good reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.857 and a composite ratio of 0.857. Conclusion: The RAC-QM demonstrated good psychometric properties and is valid and reliable based on the confirmatory analysis, and it can thus be used as a tool for evaluating the level of compassionate care in Malaysia.

Suggested Citation

  • Noorhidayu Monyati Mohamed Noor & Mohd Ismail Ibrahim & Suhaily Mohd Hairon & Maizun Mohd Zain & Mohd Saiful Nazri Satiman, 2022. "Validation and Translation of the Relational Aspect of Care Questionnaire into the Malay Language (RAC-QM) to Evaluate the Compassionate Care Level of Healthcare Workers from the Patient’s Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:20:p:13486-:d:946114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13486/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13486/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carol Nash, 2021. "Online Meeting Challenges in a Research Group Resulting from COVID-19 Limitations," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Shane Sinclair & Lara B. Russell & Thomas F. Hack & Jane Kondejewski & Richard Sawatzky, 2017. "Measuring Compassion in Healthcare: A Comprehensive and Critical Review," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 10(4), pages 389-405, August.
    3. Ware, John E. & Snyder, Mary K. & Wright, W. Russell & Davies, Allyson R., 1983. "Defining and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 247-263, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noorhidayu Monyati Mohamed Noor & Mohd Ismail Ibrahim & Suhaily Mohd Hairon & Maizun Mohd Zain & Mohd Saiful Nazri Satiman, 2023. "Predictors of Healthcare Workers’ Compassionate Care Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study from Patients’ Perspective in Kelantan, Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-15, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sohail, Mohammad, 2005. "Accessibility and Quality of Government Primary Health Care: Achievement and Constraints," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 31(3-4), pages 63-98, Sept-Dec.
    2. Runtang Meng & Jingjing Li & Yunquan Zhang & Yong Yu & Yi Luo & Xiaohan Liu & Yanxia Zhao & Yuantao Hao & Ying Hu & Chuanhua Yu, 2018. "Evaluation of Patient and Medical Staff Satisfaction regarding Healthcare Services in Wuhan Public Hospitals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Waleed Al Nadabi & Mohammed A Mohammed, 2019. "Arabic Language Surveys Measuring Mothers’ Satisfaction During Childbirth: A Review," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(6), pages 169-169, June.
    4. Carol Nash, 2023. "Team Mindfulness in Online Academic Meetings to Reduce Burnout," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Mario Alexander Pfannstiel, 2016. "Bayreuth Productivity Analysis—a method for ascertaining and improving the holistic service productivity of acute care hospitals," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 65-86, January.
    6. Xiaojing Fan & Min Su & Yaxin Zhao & Duolao Wang, 2021. "Dissatisfaction with Local Medical Services for Middle-Aged and Elderly in China: What Is Relevant?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-12, April.
    7. Prof. Dr. Klaus Bendel & Prof. Dr. Wenzel Matiaske & Prof. Dr. Florian Schramm, 2000. "'Kundenzufriedenheit' bei ambulanten Pflegedienstleistern. Bestandsaufnahme und Vorschläge für ein stresstheoretisch fundiertes Messinstrument," Report 003, Werkstatt für Organisations- und Personalforschung.
    8. Bikker, Annemieke P. & Thompson, Andrew G.H., 2006. "Predicting and comparing patient satisfaction in four different modes of health care across a nation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 1671-1683, September.
    9. Irena Kovačević & Višnja Majerić Kogler & Valentina Krikšić & Boris Ilić & Adriano Friganović & Štefanija Ozimec Vulinec & Jadranka Pavić & Milan Milošević & Petra Kovačević & Davorina Petek, 2022. "Non-Medical Factors Associated with the Outcome of Treatment of Chronic Non-Malignant Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Pan, Jay & Liu, Dan & Ali, Shehzad, 2015. "Patient dissatisfaction in China: What matters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 145-153.
    11. Carol Nash, 2023. "Roles and Responsibilities for Peer Reviewers of International Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-24, June.
    12. Heather J. Bray & Jennifer Stone & Lillith Litchfield & Kara L. Britt & John L. Hopper & Wendy V. Ingman, 2022. "Together Alone: Going Online during COVID-19 Is Changing Scientific Conferences," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Barksdale, Hiram Jr. & Johnson, Julie T. & Suh, Munshik, 1997. "A relationship maintenance model: A comparison between managed health care and traditional fee-for-service," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 237-247, November.
    14. Jinlin Liu & Ying Mao, 2019. "Patient Satisfaction with Rural Medical Services: A Cross-Sectional Survey in 11 Western Provinces in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-15, October.
    15. Etter, Jean-Francois & Perneger, Thomas V., 1997. "Quantitative and qualitative assessment of patient satisfaction in a managed care plan," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 129-135, May.
    16. Pflueger, Dane, 2016. "Knowing patients: The customer survey and the changing margins of accounting in healthcare," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 17-33.
    17. Shah, Mansi B. & Bentley, John P. & McCaffrey III, David J., 2006. "Evaluations of care by adults following a denial of an advertisement-related prescription drug request: The role of expectations, symptom severity, and physician communication style," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 888-899, February.
    18. Smith, Anne M., 1999. "Some Problems When Adopting Churchill's Paradigm for the Development of Service Quality Measurement Scales," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 109-120, October.
    19. Singh, Jagdip & Cuttler, Leona & Silvers, J. B., 2004. "Toward understanding consumers' role in medical decisions for emerging treatments: Issues, framework and hypotheses," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 1054-1065, September.
    20. Daniel Boldureanu & T. Paduraru & Gabriela Boldureanu, 2011. "Featurs On Pacient Satisfaction," THE YEARBOOK OF THE "GH. ZANE" INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC RESEARCHES, Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research ( from THE ROMANIAN ACADEMY, JASSY BRANCH), vol. 20(2), pages 150-154.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:20:p:13486-:d:946114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.