A pilot study on the validity and reliability of the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) in a Chinese population

• Published in: Family practice 2010-08, Vol.27 (4), p.395-403
• Main Authors: Lam, Cindy LK, Yuen, Natalie YK, Mercer, Stewart W, Wong, Wendy
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation, Psychological; Adult; Aged; Chinese; Chinese people; Construct validity; Consultation; content validity; Female; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Hong Kong; Humans; Interviews as Topic; Male; Middle Aged; patient enablement; Physician-Patient Relations; Pilot Projects; primary care; Primary Health Care; Psychometrics; Reliability; Self Care; Sensitivity; Surveys and Questionnaires - standards; Translating; Translation; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0263-2136; 1460-2229
• DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmq021

Background. The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) was developed to measure patients’ enablement, which is an indicator of the effectiveness of a primary care consultation; however, to date, the PEI has not been tested in Asian populations. Objectives. The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability, validity, reliability and other psychometric properties of a Chinese [Hong Kong (HK)] translation of the PEI in Chinese patients in Hong Kong and whether these properties would be affected by different timing of administration. Methods. A Chinese (HK) translation of the PEI was developed by iterative forward–backward translations and the content validity was assessed by a cognitive debriefing interview with 10 Chinese patients. It was then administered to 152 adult patients attending a government-funded primary care clinic in Hong Kong both immediately after the consultation and 2–3 weeks later by telephone. Internal construct validity was assessed by item-scale correlations and factor analysis, test–retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation (ICC) and sensitivity was assessed by known group comparison. Results. The Chinese (HK) PEI was semantically equivalent to the original PEI for all items. Acceptability of the PEI was high with 83.1% response and 100% completion rates. Statistical analyses showed no difference between test and retest means as well as good reproducibility (ICC 0.75). Internal reliability determined by Cronbach’s alpha was >0.8 irrespective of timing of administration. Scale construct validity was confirmed by strong (r > 0.4) item-scale correlations and resumed to a one-factor hypothesized structure. PEI scores were significantly higher in younger patients supporting sensitivity. There was no significant difference in the psychometric properties or scores between the assessment results from immediately after and 2-weeks post-consultation. Conclusions. A Chinese (HK) translation of the PEI equivalent to the original is now available for application to Chinese populations. Pilot testing supported its acceptability, validity, reliability and sensitivity. Further studies to confirm its construct validity and responsiveness will help to establish the Chinese (HK) PEI as an outcome measure of the effectiveness of primary care consultations in Chinese patients.