A 2-item version of the Japanese Consultation and Relational Empathy measure: a pilot study using secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey in primary care.
Japan
empathy
general practice
medical education
patients
surveys and questionnaires
Journal
Family practice
ISSN: 1460-2229
Titre abrégé: Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8500875
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 11 2022
22 11 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
27
4
2022
medline:
25
11
2022
entrez:
26
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure is a patient-reported measure of physician empathy which is widely used internationally. The Japanese version of the CARE measure has very high internal reliability, suggesting that a shorter version may have adequate validity and reliability. To investigate a valid shorter version of the Japanese CARE measure. We conducted a pilot study using secondary analysis of previous data obtained from 9 general practitioners and 252 patients and used to develop the Japanese CARE measure. All 1,023 possible combinations of the Japanese CARE items (n = 1-10) were candidates for the short measure. The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and the correlations between candidate short questionnaires and the original questionnaire were calculated. After selecting the most valid short questionnaire, inter-rater reliability was determined using generalizability theory, and construct validity (Spearman's rho) was determined using patient satisfaction. Two items were selected for a pilot shorter version: item 6 "Showing care and compassion" and item 9 "Helping you to take control." These showed high internal consistency and correlations with the 10-item measure (Cronbach's alpha = 0.920, correlation = 0.979). Forty-five questionnaires per doctor allowed us to reliably differentiate between practitioners. The construct validity for the pilot short measure was high (Spearman's rho 0.706, P < 0.001). We generated a pilot 2-item version of the Japanese CARE measure. This pilot 2-item version provides a basis for future validation studies of short CARE measures in other languages.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure is a patient-reported measure of physician empathy which is widely used internationally. The Japanese version of the CARE measure has very high internal reliability, suggesting that a shorter version may have adequate validity and reliability.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate a valid shorter version of the Japanese CARE measure.
METHODS
We conducted a pilot study using secondary analysis of previous data obtained from 9 general practitioners and 252 patients and used to develop the Japanese CARE measure. All 1,023 possible combinations of the Japanese CARE items (n = 1-10) were candidates for the short measure. The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and the correlations between candidate short questionnaires and the original questionnaire were calculated. After selecting the most valid short questionnaire, inter-rater reliability was determined using generalizability theory, and construct validity (Spearman's rho) was determined using patient satisfaction.
RESULTS
Two items were selected for a pilot shorter version: item 6 "Showing care and compassion" and item 9 "Helping you to take control." These showed high internal consistency and correlations with the 10-item measure (Cronbach's alpha = 0.920, correlation = 0.979). Forty-five questionnaires per doctor allowed us to reliably differentiate between practitioners. The construct validity for the pilot short measure was high (Spearman's rho 0.706, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
We generated a pilot 2-item version of the Japanese CARE measure. This pilot 2-item version provides a basis for future validation studies of short CARE measures in other languages.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35471659
pii: 6574303
doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmac034
pmc: PMC9680666
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1169-1175Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.
Références
BMC Pediatr. 2018 Feb 13;18(1):57
pubmed: 29439733
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Sep;68(674):e621-e626
pubmed: 30012809
J Psychosom Res. 2006 Jun;60(6):631-7
pubmed: 16731240
J Clin Psychol. 2011 Jun;67(6):591-608
pubmed: 21381026
J Educ Health Promot. 2020 Sep 28;9:249
pubmed: 33209941
Psychol Assess. 2000 Mar;12(1):102-11
pubmed: 10752369
Fam Pract. 2004 Dec;21(6):699-705
pubmed: 15528286
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Mar 31;22(1):59
pubmed: 33789572
Clin Psychol Psychother. 2016 Jan-Feb;23(1):77-86
pubmed: 25504780
Eval Health Prof. 2004 Sep;27(3):237-51
pubmed: 15312283
Fam Pract. 2017 Feb;34(1):119-124
pubmed: 27920117
Med Teach. 2020 Jan;42(1):4-16
pubmed: 31518544
Croat Med J. 2015 Feb;56(1):50-6
pubmed: 25727042
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Aug 16;19(1):138
pubmed: 30115032
Fam Pract. 2009 Oct;26(5):398-406
pubmed: 19587027
Palliat Med. 2007 Jul;21(5):391-9
pubmed: 17901098
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2017 Sep;35(3):286-292
pubmed: 28768444
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Feb 22;:1-6
pubmed: 35191359
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Aug 21;17(1):136
pubmed: 28823250
Fam Pract. 2005 Jun;22(3):328-34
pubmed: 15772120
Periodontol 2000. 2016 Oct;72(1):13-8
pubmed: 27501488
CMAJ. 2011 Mar 22;183(5):569-71
pubmed: 21262946
J Perianesth Nurs. 2010 Oct;25(5):322-4
pubmed: 20875890
Br J Gen Pract. 2002 Oct;52 Suppl:S9-12
pubmed: 12389763
Fam Pract. 2014 Feb;31(1):118-26
pubmed: 24115011
Implement Sci. 2018 Jul 26;13(1):98
pubmed: 30045735
BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Jun 01;12:43
pubmed: 21631927
J Chiropr Med. 2019 Jun;18(2):106-114
pubmed: 31367197
Ann Fam Med. 2019 Jul;17(4):311-318
pubmed: 31285208
Br J Cancer. 2003 Mar 10;88(5):658-65
pubmed: 12618870
Fam Pract. 2021 Jun 17;38(3):353-359
pubmed: 33340321