Development of a questionnaire to assess communication preferences of patients with chronic illness

Patient Education and Counseling

Volumn 82, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 81-88

  Farin, Erik ^a   Gramm, Lukas ^a   Kosiol, Desiree ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Communication preferences; Item response theory; Patient participation; Provider patient communication

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO ILLNESS; BACKACHE; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMMUNICATION SKILL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NURSE ATTITUDE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BACK PAIN; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMMUNICATION; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; GERMANY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77958473629     PISSN: 07383991     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.02.011     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Safran D.G., Montgomery J.E., Chang H., Murphy J., Rogers W.H. Switching doctors: predictors of voluntary disenrollment from a primary physician's practice. J Fam Pract 2001, 50:130-136.
2. Bredart A., Bouleuc C., Dolbeault S. Doctor-patient communication and satisfaction with care in oncology. Curr Opin Oncol 2005, 17:351-354.
3. Liang W., Kasman D., Wang J.H., Yuan E.H., Mandelblatt J.S. Communication between older women and physicians: preliminary implications for satisfaction and intention to have mammography. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 64:387-392.
4. Arora N.K. Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians' communication behavior. Soc Sci Med 2003, 57:791-806.
5. Stewart M., Brown J.B., Donner A., McWhinney I.R., Oates J., Weston W.W., et al. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract 2000, 49:796-804.
6. Trummer U.F., Mueller U.O., Nowak P., Stidl T., Pelikan J.M. Does physician-patient communication that aims at empowering patients improve clinical outcome? A case study. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 61:299-306.
7. Franks P., Jerant A.F., Fiscella K., Shields C.G., Tancredi D.J., Epstein R.M. Studying physician effects on patient outcomes: physician interactional style and performance on quality of care indicators. Soc Sci Med 2006, 62:422-432.
8. Michie S., Miles J., Weinman J. Patient-centredness in chronic illness: what is it and does it matter?. Patient Educ Couns 2003, 51:197-206.
9. Swenson S.L., Buell S., Zettler P., White M., Ruston D.C., Lo B. Patient-centered communication. Do patients really prefer it?. J Gen Intern Med 2004, 19:1069-1079.
10. Street R.L., Krupat E., Bell R.A., Kravitz R.L., Haidet P. Beliefs about control in the physician-patient relationship: effect on communication in medical encounters. J Gen Intern Med 2003, 18:609-616.
11. Bastiaens H., Van Royen P., Pavlic D.R., Raposo V., Baker R. Older people's preferences for involvement in their own care: a qualitative study in primary health care in 11 European countries. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 68:33-42.
12. Epstein R.M., Franks P., Fiscella K., Shields C.G., Meldrum S.C., Kravitz R.L., et al. Measuring patient-centered communication in patient-physician consultations: theoretical and practical issues. Soc Sci Med 2005, 61:1516-1528.
13. Swenson S.L., Zettler P., Lo B. She gave it her best shot right away: patient experiences of biomedical and patient-centered communication. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 61:200-211.
14. Say R., Murtagh M., Thomson R. Patients' preference for involvement in medical decision making: a narrative review. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 60:102-114.
15. Vogel B.A., Bengel J., Helmes A.W. Information and decision making: patients' needs and experiences in the course of breast cancer treatment. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 71:79-85.
16. Hall J.A., Stein T.S., Roter D.L., Rieser N. Inaccuracies in physicians' perceptions of their patients. Med Care 1999, 37:1164-1168.
17. Hudak P.L., Frankel R.M., Braddock C.I., Nisenbaum R., Luca P., McKeever C., et al. Do patients' communication behaviors provide insight into their preferences for participation in decision making?. Med Decis Making 2008, 28:385-393.
18. Garfield S., Smith F., Francis S.A., Chalmers C. Can patients' preferences for involvement in decision-making regarding the use of medicines be predicted?. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 66:361-367.
19. Levinson W., Kao A., Kuby A., Thisted R.A. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med 2005, 20:531-535.
20. Degner L.F., Sloan J.A. Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play?. J Clin Epidemiol 1992, 45:941-950.
21. O'Donnell M., Hunskaar S. Preferences for involvement in treatment decision-making generally and in hormone replacement and urinary incontinence treatment decision-making specifically. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 68:243-251.
22. Ende J., Kazis L., Ash A., Moskowitz M.A. Measuring patients' desire for autonomy: decision making and information-seeking preferences among medical patients. J Gen Intern Med 1989, 4:23-30.
23. Ishikawa H., Hashimoto H., Yano E. Patients' preferences for decision making and the feeling of being understood in the medical encounter among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2006, 55:878-883.
24. Schneider A., Wensing M., Quinzler R., Bieber C., Szecsenyi J. Higher preference for participation in treatment decisions is associated with lower medication adherence in asthma patients. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 67:57-62.
25. Krupat E., Rosenkranz S.L., Yeager C.M., Barnard K., Putnam S.M., Inui T.S. The practice orientations of physicians and patients: the effect of doctor-patient congruence on satisfaction. Patient Educ Couns 2000, 39:49-59.
26. Arora N.K., McHorney C.A. Patient preferences for medical decision making: who really wants to participate?. Med Care 2000, 38:335-341.
27. Detmar S.B., Aaronson N.K., Wever L.D.V., Muller M., Schornagel J.H. How are you feeling? Who wants to know? Patients' and oncologists' preferences for discussing health-related quality-of-life issues. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:3295-3301.
28. Mavis B., Vasilenko P., Schnuth R., Marshall J., Colavito Jeffs M. Female patients' preferences related to interpersonal communications, clinical competence, and gender when selecting a physician. Acad Med 2005, 80:1159-1165.
29. Jahng K.H., Martin L.R., Golin C.E., DiMatteo M.R. Preferences for medical collaboration: patient-physician congruence and patient outcomes. Patient Educ Couns 2005, 57:308-314.
30. Schattner A., Rudin D., Jellin N. Good physicians from the perspective of their patients. BMC Health Serv Res 2004, 4:26.
31. Edelen M.O., Reeve B.B. Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Qual Life Res 2007, 16:5-18.
32. Reise S.P., Waller N.G. Item response theory and clinical measurement. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2009, 5:27-48.
33. Makoul G. Essential elements of communication in medical encounters: the Kalamazoo Consensus Statement. Acad Med 2001, 76:390-393.
34. Roter D. The enduring and evolving nature of the patient-physician relationship. Patient Educ Couns 2000, 39:5-15.
35. Teresi J.A., Fleishman J.A. Differential item functioning and health assessment. Qual Life Res 2007, 16(Suppl. 1):33-42.
36. Lehoux P., Poland B., Daudelin G. Focus group research and "the patient's view" Soc Sci Med 2006, 63:2091-2104.
37. Stewart D.W., Rook D.W., Shamdasani P.N. Focus groups: theory and practice 2006, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. 2nd ed.
38. ATLAS.ti (Version 5.2.0) 2007, Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin.
39. Sim J., Wright C.C. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 2005, 85:257-268.
40. Brenner H., Kliebsch U. Dependence of weighted Kappa coefficients on the number of categories. Epidemiology 1996, 7:199-202.
41. Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:229-238.
42. Reeve B.B., Hays R.D., Bjorner J.B., Cook K.F., Crane P.K., Teresi J.A., et al. Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life banks. Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care 2007, 45:S22-S31.
43. Rose M., Bjorner J.B., Becker J., Fries J.F., Ware J.E. Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). J Clin Epidemiol 2008, 61:17-33.
44. Graham J.W. Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world. Annu Rev Psychol 2009, 60:549-576.
45. Schafer JL, NORM: multiple imputation of incomplete multivariate data under a normal model, version 2.03 (software for Windows 95/98/NT), available from >; 1999. http://www.stat.psu.edu/~jls/misoftwa.html.
46. Hahn E.A., Rao D., Cella D., Choi S.W. Comparability of interview- and self-administration of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) in English- and Spanish-speaking ambulatory cancer patients. Med Care 2008, 46:423-431.
47. AMOS 16.0, AMOS Development Corporation, Crawfordville, FL.
48. Hu L.T., Bentler P. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Model 1999, 6:1-55.
49. Tucker L., Lewis C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 1973, 38:1-10.
50. Coster W.J., Haley S.M., Andres P.L., Ludlow L.H., Bond T.L.Y., Peng-sheng N. Refining the conceptual basis for rehabilitation outcome measurement. Personal care and instrumental activities domain. Med Care 2004, 42:I-62-I-72.
51. Conrad K.J., Smith E.V. International Conference on Objective Measurement. Applications of Rasch Analysis in Health Care. Med Care 2004, 41(Suppl.):I1-I6.
52. Bond T.G., Fox C.M. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
53. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.R.A. Psychometric theory 1994, McGraw-Hill, New York. 3rd ed.
54. Prieto L., Alonso J., Lamarca R. Classical test theory versus Rasch analysis for quality of life questionnaire reduction. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003, 1:27.
55. Ommen O., Janssen C., Neugebauer E., Bouillon B., Rehm K., Rangger C., et al. Trust, social support and patient type, Associations between patients perceived trust, supportive communication and patients preferences in regard to paternalism, clarification and participation of severely injured patients. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 73:196-204.
56. Cegala D.J., Coleman M.T., Turner J.W. The development and partial assessment of the medical communication competence scale. Health Commun 1998, 10:261-288.
57. Embretson S.E., Reise S.P. Item response theory for psychologists 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Mahwah, NJ.
58. Cook K.F., O'Malley K.J., Roddey T.S. Dynamic assessment of health outcomes: time to let the CAT out of the bag?. Health Serv Res 2005, 40(Part II):1694-1711.
59. Parker P.A., Baile W.F., de Moor C., Lenzi R., Kudelka A.P., Cohen L. Breaking news about cancer: patients' preferences for communication. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19:2049-2056.
60. Leckie J., Bull R., Vrij A. The development of a scale to discover outpatients' perceptions of the relative desirability of different elements of doctors' communication behaviours. Patient Educ Couns 2006, 64:69-77.
61. Collins S. Explanations in consultations: the combined effectiveness of doctors' and nurses' communication with patients. Med Educ 2005, 39:785-796.
62. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.R.A. Psychometric theory 1994, McGraw-Hill, New York.
63. Fujimori M., Akechi T., Morita T., Inagaki M., Akizuki N., SakanoY, et al. Preferences of cancer patients regarding the disclosure of bad news. Psychooncology 2007, 16:573-581.