Validation of the Polish version of the Quality of the Carer-Patient Relationship (QCPR) questionnaire in a population of seniors with dementia and their caregivers
Introduction: Quality of the Carer-Patient Relationship (QCPR) questionnaire is a specific scale for testing the quality of relationship between the caregiver and the care recipient. Aims: The aim of the study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Polish language version of the QCPR q...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Univeristy of Physical Education in Krakow
2021-02-01
|
| Series: | Rehabilitacja Medyczna |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://rehmed.pl/gicid/01.3001.0014.7766 |
| Summary: | Introduction: Quality of the Carer-Patient Relationship (QCPR) questionnaire is a specific scale for testing the quality of relationship between the caregiver and the care recipient.
Aims: The aim of the study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Polish language version of the QCPR questionnaire.
Material and methods: The study was conducted in a group of 102 people who agreed to participate in the trial. The group included 43 seniors with early and intermediate dementia and 59 carers of people with dementia. The snowball method was used in the selection of the sample. All respondents lived in the following provinces: Małopolskie and Śląskie. Respondents completed the paper version of the QCPR questionnaire once. The research was carried out in January 2020.
Results: Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients (α) for the Polish language version was α = 0.93α, which means that a very high level of internal consistency was noted.
Conclusions: The proposed Polish language version of the Quality of the Carer-Patient Relationship (QCPR) questionnaire enables an assessment of the quality of relationships between people forming caregiving dyads. It should be noted that the analysis concerns a single-factor variant. Although the level of reliability of the predefined scales is high (warmth: α = 0.93; criticism: α = 0.75), the analyses show that it is a purely arbitrary, content division and the responses of the participants do not conform to the scales defined in the original version of the questionnaire. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1427-9622 1896-3250 |