Exportar Publicação

Rosa Silva, Bobrowicz-Campos, E., Paulo Santos-Costa, Isabel Gil, Hugo Neves & Apóstolo, João (2021). The Quality of Carer–Patient Relationship Scale: Adaptation and Validation into Portuguese. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (3), 1264

R. Silva et al.,  "The Quality of Carer–Patient Relationship Scale: Adaptation and Validation into Portuguese", in Int. Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1264, 2021

@article{silva2021_1734631356554,
	author = "Rosa Silva and Bobrowicz-Campos, E. and Paulo Santos-Costa and Isabel Gil and Hugo Neves and Apóstolo, João",
	title = "The Quality of Carer–Patient Relationship Scale: Adaptation and Validation into Portuguese",
	journal = "International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health",
	year = "2021",
	volume = "18",
	number = "3",
	doi = "10.3390/ijerph18031264",
	pages = "1264",
	url = "https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/1264"
}

TY  - JOUR
TI  - The Quality of Carer–Patient Relationship Scale: Adaptation and Validation into Portuguese
T2  - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
VL  - 18
IS  - 3
AU  - Rosa Silva
AU  - Bobrowicz-Campos, E.
AU  - Paulo Santos-Costa
AU  - Isabel Gil
AU  - Hugo Neves
AU  - Apóstolo, João
PY  - 2021
SP  - 1264
SN  - 1660-4601
DO  - 10.3390/ijerph18031264
UR  - https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/1264
AB  - Background: This study aimed to translate and adapt the Quality of the Carer–Patient Relationship (QCPR) scale into Portuguese and analyse both its psychometric properties and correlation with sociodemographic and clinical variables. Methods: Phase (1) Translate and culturally adapt the scale. Phase (2) Assess the scale’s confirmatory factorial analysis, internal consistency, construct validity, and correlations. Results: The experts classified the overall quality of the translation as adequate. A total of 53 dyads (cared-for person and carer) were assessed. In both versions, measures of central tendency and symmetry were also adequate, and the two factors under investigation had appropriate reliability, although in the conflict/critical factor, this was more fragile. Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.89 for the cared-for person version and 0.91 for the carer version. Conclusions: The QCPR scale showed satisfactory to good values of reliability. The assessment is essential to guarantee structured interventions by health professionals, since the quality of the dyads’ relationship seems to influence both older adults’ quality of life and carers’ health status. This study is a significant contribution to the introduction of the QCPR scale in the Portuguese clinical and scientific culture but also an opportunity to increase its use internationally.
ER  -