Volume 27, Issue 6 e12913
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Reliability and validity of the Hebrew version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire for measuring patients' perceived continuity of care in oral anticancer therapy

Orit Cohen Castel

Corresponding Author

Orit Cohen Castel

The Cheryl Spencer Department of Nursing, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Correspondence

Orit Cohen Castel, The Cheryl Spencer Department of Nursing, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Efrat Dagan

Efrat Dagan

The Cheryl Spencer Department of Nursing, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Search for more papers by this author
Lital Keinan-Boker

Lital Keinan-Boker

School of Public Health, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Search for more papers by this author
Efrat Shadmi

Efrat Shadmi

The Cheryl Spencer Department of Nursing, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 20 September 2018
Citations: 7

Funding information

This study was funded by grants from the Israel Cancer Association (no. 20140089), the Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research (no. 2015/84) and from Maccabi Institute for Health Services Research (no.28/2016).

Abstract

To assess the validity and reliability of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire in Hebrew (NCQ-H) for measuring patients' perceived continuity of care in the multiprovider setting of oral anticancer therapy (OACT). Following forward–backward translation of the original instrument into Hebrew, the NCQ-H was administered to adult cancer patients in five oncology centres in Israel, 2–3 months after initiation of OACT (either targeted, hormonal or chemotherapy). Confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the validity and reliability of the NCQ-H respectively. A total of 135 patients completed the questionnaire. The postanalysis models for measuring “personal continuity with care provider” (eight items for each provider: the oncology specialist and the primary care physician), and “team/cross-boundary continuity” (four items for each setting: within the oncology team, and between the oncology specialist and the primary care physician) showed good fit for the observed data (root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.02; RMSEA = 0.015; for each model respectively). Cronbach's alpha was 0.79–0.95 for all subscales. Conclusions. This study provides preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of the NCQ-H in assessing cancer patients' experience with continuity of care and for its usability in the context of OACT.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

All authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.