The Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire (CSSQP) for colorectal cancer screening: A development and validation study

15Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Colonoscopy services working in colorectal cancer screening programs must perform periodic controls to improve the quality based on patients’ experiences. However, there are no validated instruments in this setting that include the two core dimensions for optimal care: satisfaction and safety. The aim of this study was to design and validate a specific questionnaire for patients undergoing screening colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test, the Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire based on patients’ experience (CSSQP). The design included a review of available evidence and used focus groups to identify the relevant dimensions to produce the instrument (content validity). Face validity was analyzed involving 15 patients. Reliability and construct and empirical validity were calculated. Validation involved patients from the colorectal cancer screening program at two referral hospitals in Spain. The CSSQP version 1 consisted of 15 items. The principal components analysis of the satisfaction items isolated three factors with saturation of elements above 0.52 and with high internal consistency and split-half readability: Information, Care, and Service and Facilities features. The analysis of the safety items isolated two factors with element saturations above 0.58: Information Gaps and Safety Incidents. The CSSQP is a new valid and reliable tool for measuring patient’ experiences, including satisfaction and safety perception, after a colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Brotons, A., Guilabert, M., Lacueva, F. J., Mira, J. J., Lumbreras, B., Picó, M. D., … Sola-Vera, J. (2019). The Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire (CSSQP) for colorectal cancer screening: A development and validation study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030392

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free