Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Prenatal Care | Research

Translation and measurement properties of pregnancy and childbirth questionnaire in Iranian postpartum women

Authors: Somayeh Abdolalipour, Shamsi Abbasalizadeh, Sakineh Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi, Fatemeh Abbasalizadeh, Shayesteh Jahanfar, Mohammad Asghari Jafarabadi, Kosar Abdollahi, Mojgan Mirghafourvadsnd

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Perceived care quality and patient satisfaction have been important care quality indicators in recent decades, and healthcare professionals have been influential on women’s childbirth experience. This study investigated the measurement properties of the Persian version of the Pregnancy and Childbirth Questionnaire (PCQ), designed to measure mothers’ satisfaction with the quality of healthcare services provided during pregnancy and childbirth.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional methodological study. Instrument translation, face validity, content validity, structural validity, and reliability evaluation were performed to determine the measurement properties of the PCQ’s Persian version. A backward-forward approach was employed for the translation process. Impact scores were selected based on the items’ importance to measure face validity. Content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) were calculated to measure content validity, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to measure structural validity. The cluster random sampling method was used, resulting in a sample of 250 eligible women referred to the health centers of Tabriz, Iran, who were 4 to 6 weeks after giving birth. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) using a test-retest approach were used to determine the questionnaire’s reliability.

Results

The impact scores of all items were above 1.5, which indicates a suitable face validity. The content validity was also favorable (CVR = 0.95, CVI = 0.90). Exploratory factor analysis on 25 items led to the removal of item 2 due to a factor loading of less than 0.3 and the extraction of three factors explaining 65.07% of the variances. The results of the sample adequacy size were significant (< 0.001, and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = 0.886). The model’s validity was confirmed based on the confirmatory factor analysis fit indicators (i.e., RMSEA = 0.08, SRMR = 0.09, TLI = 0.91, CFI = 0.93, x²/df = 4.65). The tool’s reliability was also confirmed (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88, and ICC (95% CI) = 0.93 (0.88 to 0.95)).

Conclusion

The validity and reliability of the PCQ’s Persian version were suitable to measure the extent to which Iranian women are satisfied with the quality of prenatal and intrapartum care.

Available only for authorised users

Kyei-Nimakoh M, Carolan-Olah M, McCann TV. Access barriers to obstetric care at health facilities in sub-saharan Africa—a systematic review. Syst Reviews. 2017;6(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0503-x.CrossRef

Truijens SE, Banga FR, Fransen AF, Pop VJ, van Runnard Heimel PJ, Oei SG. The effect of multi-professional simulation-based obstetric team training on patient-reported quality of care: a pilot study. Simul Healthc. 2015;10(4):210–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000099.CrossRefPubMed

Truijens SE, Pommer AM, van Runnard Heimel PJ, Verhoeven CJ, Oei SG, Pop VJ. Development of the pregnancy and Childbirth Questionnaire (PCQ): evaluating quality of care as perceived by women who recently gave birth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;174:35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.11.019.CrossRefPubMed

Perdok H, Verhoeven CJ, Van Dillen J, Schuitmaker TJ, Hoogendoorn K, Colli J, Schellevis FG, De Jonge A. Continuity of care is an important and distinct aspect of childbirth experience: findings of a survey evaluating experienced continuity of care, experienced quality of care and women’s perception of labor. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1615-y.CrossRef

Lemmens SM, van Montfort P, Meertens LJ, Spaanderman ME, Smits LJ, de Vries RG, Scheepers HC. Perinatal factors related to pregnancy and childbirth satisfaction: a prospective cohort study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2021;42(3):181–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2019.1708894.CrossRef

Khayat S, Dolatian M, Navidian A, Mahmoodi Z. Factors Affecting Adequacy of Prenatal Care in Suburban women of Southeast Iran: A Cross -sectional study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2018;12(4):QC01–5.

Bahmani S, Shahoie R, Rahmani K. The quality of prenatal care from the perspective of the service recipients using the Servqual pattern during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sanandaj Comprehensive Health Centers. Nurs Midwife J. 2022;20(4):324–33. (Persian).CrossRef

Simbar M, Nahidi F, Akbarzadeh A. Assessment of quality of prenatal care in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences health centers. Payesh J. 2012;11(4):529–44. (Persian).

Camacho FT, Weisman CS, Anderson RT, Hillemeier MM, Schaefer EW, Paul IM. Development and validation of a scale measuring satisfaction with maternal and newborn health care following childbirth. Matern Child Health J. 2012;16(5):997–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-011-0823-8.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Heaman MI, Sword WA, Akhtar-Danesh N, Bradford A, Tough S, Janssen PA, Young DC, Kingston DA, Hutton EK, Helewa ME. Quality of prenatal care questionnaire: instrument development and testing. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14(1):1–6.CrossRef

11.

Sjetne IS, Iversen HH, Kjøllesdal JG. A questionnaire to measure women’s experiences with pregnancy, birth, and postnatal care: instrument development and assessment following a national survey in Norway. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15(1):1–1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0611-3.CrossRef

12.

Peters M, Kolip P, Schäfers R. A questionnaire to measure the quality of midwifery care in the postpartum period from women’s point of view: development and psychometric testing of MMAY postpartum. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021;21(1):1–0. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03857-8.CrossRef

13.

Comrey A, Lee H. A first course in factor analysis: psychology press. New York: Taylor and Francis Group; 2013.CrossRef

14.

Lee WL, Chinna K. The forward-backward and dual-panel translation methods are comparable in producing semantic equivalent versions of a heart quality of life questionnaire. Int J Nurs Pract. 2019;25(1):e12715. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12715.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Setia MS. Methodology Series Module 9: Designing questionnaires and Clinical Record forms - Part II. Indian J Dermatol. 2017;62(3):258–61. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijd.IJD_200_17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30(4):459–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975;28(4):563–75.CrossRef

18.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Manapat PD, Anderson SF, Edwards MC. Evaluating avoidable heterogeneity in exploratory factor analysis results. Psychol Methods. 2023 May;11. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000589.

20.

Harerimana A, Mtshali NG. Using exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis to understand the role of technology in nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;92:104490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104490.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Schreiber J, Nora A, Stage F, Barlow L, King J. Confirmatory factor analyses and structural equations modeling: an introduction and review. J Educ Res. 2006;99(6).

22.

Rousson V, Gasser T, Seifert B. Assessing interarater, interrater and test–retest reliability of continuous measurements. Stat Med. 2002;21(22):3431–46.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284.CrossRef

24.

Sawyer A, Ayers S, Abbott J, Gyte G, Rabe H, Duley L. Measures of satisfaction with care during labor and birth: a comparative review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13(1):1–0.CrossRef

25.

Britton J. The assessment of satisfaction with care in the perinatal period. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2012;33:37–44. https://doi.org/10.3109/0167482X.2012.658464.CrossRef

26.

Goberna-Tricas J, Banu´ s-Gime´nez MR, Palacio-Tauste A. Satisfaction with pregnancy and birth services: the quality of maternity care services as experienced by women. Midwifery. 2011;27:231–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2010.10.004.CrossRef

27.

Lomas J, Dore S, Enkin M, Mitchell A. The labor and delivery satisfaction index– the development and evaluation of a soft outcome measure. Birth. 1987;14:125–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.1987.tb01472.x.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Morgan PJ, Halpern S, Lo J. The development of a maternal satisfaction scale for cesarean section. Int J Obstet Anesth. 1999;8:165–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-289X(99)80132-0.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Sandin-Bojo AK, Larsson BW, Hall-Lord ML. Women’s perception of intrapartal care in relation to WHO recommendations. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17:2993–3003. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02123.x.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Wilde Larsson B, Larsson G, Kvist LJ, Sandin-Bojo AK. Women’s opinions on intrapartal care: development of a theory-based questionnaire. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:1748–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03055.x.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Translation and measurement properties of pregnancy and childbirth questionnaire in Iranian postpartum women
Authors: Somayeh Abdolalipour
Shamsi Abbasalizadeh
Sakineh Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi
Fatemeh Abbasalizadeh
Shayesteh Jahanfar
Mohammad Asghari Jafarabadi
Kosar Abdollahi
Mojgan Mirghafourvadsnd
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Prenatal Care
Published in: BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10689-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Translation and measurement properties of pregnancy and childbirth questionnaire in Iranian postpartum women

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Nurses’ perspectives on user-friendly self-sampling interventions for diagnosis of sexually transmitted infections among young women in eThekwini district municipality: a nominal group technique

Barriers and enablers for externally and internally driven implementation processes in healthcare: a qualitative cross-case study

A comprehensive value-based method for new nuclear medical service pricing: with case study of radium [223Ra] bone metastases treatment

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of prehabilitation for elderly frail patients prior to elective surgery: a qualitative study with healthcare professionals

Adjusting advance care planning to older people’s needs: results from focus groups and interviews

“I want to see them thrive!”: exploring health service research priorities for young Aboriginal children growing up in Alice Springs – a qualitative study