Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Spanish Quality in Psychiatric Care Forensic Inpatient Staff (QPC-FIPS) instrument.

"Quality in Psychiatric Care-Forensic Inpatient Staff (QPC-FIPS) is an instrument of Swedish origin validated to measure the perception of the quality of mental health care provided by forensic psychiatry professionals. The aim of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the QPC-FIPS instrument and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the instrument. A psychometric study was carried out. For validity, content validity, convergent validity and construct validity were included. For reliability, the analysis of internal consistency and temporal stability was included. The sample consisted of 153 mental health professionals from four Forensic Psychiatry units. The adapted Spanish version of the QPC-FIPS scale was configured with the same number of items and dimensions as the original. The psychometric properties, in terms of temporal stability and internal consistency, were adequate and the factor structure, such as the homogeneity of the dimensions of the Spanish version of the QPC-FIPS, was equivalent to the original Swedish version. We found that the QPC_FIPS-Spanish is a valid, reliable and easy-to-apply instrument for assessing the self-perception of professionals regarding the care they provide.

Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: A systematic review.

AIM: To identify the methodological quality of each study and analyse the psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction with care from the perspective of mental health patients and professionals. BACKGROUND: In recent years, interest in rigorously assessing quality of care in mental health and nursing has increased. Health professionals and researchers should select the most adequate instrument based on knowledge of its measurement properties. REVIEW DESIGN: A psychometric review was conducted of the instruments from the perspectives of both patients and professionals according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments panel (COSMIN). DATA SOURCES: Articles published from January 2005 - September 2016 were identified in a search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS. We included studies in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. REVIEW METHODS: Inclusion criteria were applied to all articles validated and reviewed by a second independent reviewer. The analysis included the use of the COSMIN checklist and the Terwee quality criteria. RESULTS: In the 34 studies selected, a total of 22 instruments which measure quality and satisfaction with care provided, according to patients and/or professionals, were identified. Most are instruments with sound, contemporary theoretical foundations. They vary to the extent to which they have been used in empirical studies and with respect to evaluation of their validity and reliability, although five instruments stand out as yielding good-excellent values in quality criteria. CONCLUSION: The present psychometric review found that five of the instruments met valid psychometric criteria. In light of the current economic situation, future reviews should include analysis of the usefulness of instruments based on cost-effectiveness, acceptability, and educational impact.