Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the CANHELP Lite Bereavement Questionnaire

Abstract

Background: Satisfaction with care is an important outcome measure in end-of-life care. Validated instruments are necessary to evaluate and disseminate interventions that improve satisfaction with care at the end of life, contributing to improving the quality of care offered at the end of life to the Portuguese population. The purpose of this study was to perform a cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric analysis of the Portuguese version of the CANHELP Lite Bereavement Questionnaire. Methods: Methodological research with an analytical approach that includes translation, semantic, and cultural adaptation. Results: The Portuguese version comprised 24 items. A panel of experts and bereaved family members found it acceptable and that it had face and content validity. A total of 269 caregivers across several care settings in the northern region of Portugal were recruited for further testing. The internal consistency analysis of the adapted instrument resulted in a global alpha value of 0.950. The correlation between the adapted CANHELP questionnaire and a global rating of satisfaction was of 0.886 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The instrument has good psychometric properties. It was reliable and valid in assessing caregivers’ satisfaction with end-of-life care and can be used in both clinical and research settings.

Development and Validation of the QUALI-PALLI-FAM Questionnaire for Assessing Relatives' Perception of Quality of Inpatient Palliative Care: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Survey

“…[20,21] Two Canadian psychometric questionnaires assessing family caregivers' satisfaction with care have been extensively used, namely the CANHELP and FAMCARE-2 questionnaires. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] Our research program, the "QUALI-PALLI project" aims to obtain a comprehensive assessment of palliative care including (i) the patient's point of view, (ii) relatives' perspectives, (iii) file review for care assessment, and (iv) professional caregivers' well-being. [15,32] To ensure coherency, we developed our own instruments and refrained from using existing questionnaires, regardless of their quality.…”