Rasch analysis of the Psychiatric Out-Patient Experiences Questionnaire (POPEQ)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Psychiatric Out-Patient Experiences Questionnaire (POPEQ) is an 11-item core measure of psychiatric out-patients experiences of the perceived outcome of the treatment, the quality of interaction with the clinician, and the quality of information provision. The POPEQ was found to have evidence for reliability and validity following the application of classical test theory but has not previously been assessed by Rasch analysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two national postal surveys of psychiatric outpatients took place in Norway in 2004 and 2007. The performance of the POPEQ, including item functioning and differential item functioning, was assessed by Rasch analysis. Principal component analysis of item residuals was used to assess the presence of subdimensions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>6,677 (43.3%) and 11,085 (35.2%) psychiatric out patients responded to the questionnaire in 2004 and 2007, respectively. All items in the scale were retained after the Rasch analysis. The resulting scale had reasonably good fit to the Rasch model. The items performed the same for the two survey years and there was no differential item functioning relating to patient characteristics. Principal component analysis of the residuals confirmed that the measure to a high degree is unidimensional. However, the data also reflects three potential subscales, each relating to one of the three included aspects of health care.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The POPEQ had excellent psychometric properties and Rasch analysis further supported the construct validity of the scale by also identifying the three subdimensions originally included as components in the instrument development. The 11-item instrument is recommended in future research on psychiatric out-patient experiences. Future development may lead to the construction of more precise measures of the three subdomains that the POPEQ is based on.</p

A tiered multidisciplinary approach to the psychosocial care of adult cancer patients integrated into routine care: the PROMPT study (a cluster-randomised controlled trial).

PURPOSE: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a brief psychosocial intervention for depressed cancer patients, delivered by trained front-line health professionals in routine clinical care. METHODS: Nine hundred two patients were assessed across four treatment centres which were allocated in random order from control epoch to intervention epoch. Eligible patients had Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores of 8 or greater. Of eligible patients, 222 were recruited in control epoch and 247 in intervention epoch. Twenty-seven health professionals (HPs) were trained to deliver the psychosocial intervention consisting of up to four sessions, tailored to patient symptoms and distress. HPs participated in group supervision with a psychiatrist. The primary outcome, analysed by intention to treat, was depression measured with the HADS at 10 weeks after receiving the intervention. RESULTS: At 10-week follow-up, there were no significant differences in HADS score for the 181 patients in control epoch and 177 in intervention epoch (adjusted difference -1.23, 95 % CI -3.81--1.35, p = 0.35). Patients with disease progression who received the intervention experienced significant benefits in unmet practical support needs including care and support, information, and physical and daily living. CONCLUSION: A brief psychosocial intervention delivered by front-line oncology health professionals is feasible to deliver but is insufficient as a stand-alone treatment for depression in cancer patients. Psychosocial interventions should be targeted to populations most likely to experience benefit