We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Questionnaires developed for patient evaluation of the quality of primary care are often focussed on primary care systems in developed countries.
Aim
To report the development and validation of the patient evaluation scale (PES) designed for use in the Nigerian primary health care context.
Methods
An iterative process was used to develop and validate the questionnaire using patients attending 28 primary health centres across eight states in Nigeria. The development involved literature review, patient interviews, expert reviews, cognitive testing with patients and waves of quantitative cross-sectional surveys. The questionnaire’s content validity, internal structures, acceptability, reliability and construct validity are reported.
Findings
The full and shortened version of PES with 27 and 18 items, respectively, were developed through these process. The low item non-response from the serial cross-sectional surveys depicts questionnaire’s acceptability among the local population. PES-short form (SF) has Cronbach’s α of 0.87 and three domains (codenamed ‘facility’, ‘organisation’ and ‘health care’) with Cronbach’s αs of 0.78, 0.79 and 0.81, respectively. Items in the multi-dimensional questionnaire demonstrated adequate convergent and discriminant properties. PES-SF scores show significant positive correlation with scores of the full PES and also discriminated population groups in support of a priori hypotheses.
Conclusion
The PES and PES-SF contain items that are relevant to the needs of patients in Nigeria. The good measurement properties of the questionnaire demonstrates its potential usefulness for patient-focussed quality improvement activities in Nigeria. There is still need to translate these questionnaires into major languages in Nigeria and assess their validity against external quality criteria.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.