Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2019; 41(06): 371-378
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692125
Original Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Content and Face Validity of the Mackey Childbirth Satisfaction Rating Scale Questionnaire Cross-culturally Adapted to Brazilian Portuguese

Validação de face e conteúdo da Escala Mackey de Avaliação da Satisfação com o Parto, transculturalmente adaptada para o português brasileiro
Fernanda Lopes
1   Department of Obstetrics, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Nelson Carvas Júnior
2   Postgraduate program in Health Sciences, Instituto de Assistência Médica ao Servidor Público Estadual, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Mary Uchiyama Nakamura
1   Department of Obstetrics, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Roseli Mieko Yamamoto Nomura 
1   Department of Obstetrics, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 November 2018

04 April 2019

Publication Date:
27 June 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the content and face validity of the Mackey Childbirth Satisfaction Rating Scale (MCSRS) questionnaire cross-culturally adapted to Brazilian Portuguese.

Methods The MCSRS is a questionnaire with 34 items related to childbirth satisfaction. The forward- and back-translated versions were compared with the original material, and 10 experts analyzed each item according to the following criteria: clarity, semantic equivalence, appropriateness, and cultural relevance. The final version was presented to 10 mothers for face validation to ensure the questionnaire would suit the target population.

Results The total of 34 items assessed by experts for clarity, semantic equivalence, appropriateness, and relevance showed positive agreement of 0.85, 0.92, 0.97 and 0.97; negative agreement of 0.13, 0.09, 0.04 and 0.04; and total agreement of 0.75; 0.85, 0.94 and 0.94, respectively. Multilevel linear modeling was applied with crossed random effects and with nested random effects for each judge. The intercept of each criterion was as follows: clarity, 0.87; semantic equivalence, 0.92; appropriateness, 0.96; and cultural relevance, 0.96. The overall mean of agreement was 92.8%. The face validity measurement yielded 80% of agreement on the items, all of them clearly understood.

Conclusion The final version of the Brazilian Portuguese MCSRS questionnaire had face and content validity confirmed. This instrument of evaluation of maternal satisfaction during childbirth was validated to be applied in the Brazilian female population.

Resumo

Objetivo O objetivo deste estudo foi determinar a validação de face e conteúdo da Escala Mackey de Avaliação da Satisfação com o Parto (MCSRS, na sigla em inglês), transculturalmente adaptada para o português brasileiro.

Métodos O MCSRS é um questionário com 34 itens relacionados à satisfação com o parto. As versões traduzida e retrotraduzida foram comparadas com o material original, e 10 especialistas analisaram cada item de acordo com os seguintes critérios: clareza, equivalência semântica, pertinência e relevância cultural. A versão final foi apresentada a 10 mães para validação de face, para garantir que o questionário fosse adequado à população-alvo.

Resultados O total de 34 itens avaliados por especialistas para clareza, equivalência semântica, pertinência e relevância apresentou concordância positiva de 0,85, 0,92, 0,97 e 0,97; concordância negativa de 0,13, 0,09, 0,04 e 0,04; e concordância total de 0,75; 0,85, 0,94 e 0,94, respectivamente. A modelagem linear multinível foi aplicada com efeitos aleatórios cruzados e com efeitos aleatórios aninhados para cada juiz. A intercepção de cada critério foi a seguinte: clareza, 0,87; equivalência semântica, 0,92; pertinência, 0,96; e relevância cultural, 0,96. A média geral de concordância foi de 92,8%. A mensuração da validade de face foi 80% de concordância nos itens, todos claramente entendidos.

Conclusão A versão final do questionário MCSRS do português brasileiro teve validade de face e conteúdo confirmada. Este instrumento de avaliação da satisfação materna durante o parto foi validado para ser aplicado na população feminina brasileira.

Keywords

childbirth - patient satisfaction - questionnaires - validation studies

Palavras-chave

parto - satisfação do paciente - questionários - estudos de validação

Contributions

The author R. M. Y. N. designed the protocol, F. L. collected the information, N. C. J. and F. L. performed data analysis, R. M. Y. N. and M. U. N. helped to interpret the findings, and R. M. Y. N. and F. L. wrote the final text.


 

  • References

  • 1 Sitzia J, Wood N. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med 1997; 45 (12) 1829-1843 . Doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)00128-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sullivan GM. A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Educ 2011; 3 (02) 119-120 . Doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-11-00075.1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mas-Pons R, Barona-Vilar C, Carreguí-Vilar S, Ibáñez-Gil N, Margaix-Fontestad L, Escribà-Agüir V. [Women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: validation of the Mackey Childbirth Satisfaction Rating Scale]. Gac Sanit 2012; 26 (03) 236-242 . Doi: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2011.09.019
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Survey Research Center. Guidelines for Best Practice in Cross-Cultural Surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan; 2016. http://www.ccsg.isr.umich.edu/images/PDFs/CCSG_Full_Guidelines_2016_Version.pdf . Accessed January 15, 2018.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Caballero P, Delgado-García BE, Orts-Cortes I, Moncho J, Pereyra-Zamora P, Nolasco A. Validation of the Spanish version of Mackey childbirth satisfaction rating scale. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2016; 16: 78 . Doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-0862-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Moudi Z, Tavousi M. Evaluation of Mackey Childbirth Satisfaction Rating Scale in Iran: what are the psychometric properties?. Nurs Midwifery Stud 2016; 5 (02) e29952 . Doi: 10.17795/nmsjournal29952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Goodman P, Mackey MC, Tavakoli AS. Factors related to childbirth satisfaction. J Adv Nurs 2004; 46 (02) 212-219 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2003.02981.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Christiaens W, Bracke P. Place of birth and satisfaction with childbirth in Belgium and the Netherlands. Midwifery 2009; 25 (02) e11-e19 . Doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2007.02.001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kabakian-Khasholian T, Bashour H, El-Nemer A. , et al. Women's satisfaction and perception of control in childbirth in three Arab countries. Reprod Health Matters 2017; 25 (Suppl. 01) 16-26 . Doi: 10.1080/09688080.2017.1381533
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Maneesriwongul W, Dixon JK. Instrument translation process: a methods review. J Adv Nurs 2004; 48 (02) 175-186 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03185.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, Sébille V, Hardouin JB. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2014; 12: 176 . Doi: 10.1186/s12955-014-0176-2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Pasquali L. Princípios de elaboração de escalas psicológicas. Rev Psiquiatr Clin (Santiago) 1998; 25: 206-213
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Uebersax J. Statistical Methods for Diagnostic Agreement. 2015. Available in https://www.john-uebersax.com/stat/agree.htm . 20 May 2019
    PubMed
  • 14 Kim ES, Dedrick RF, Cao C, Ferron JM. Multilevel factor analysis: reporting guidelines and a review of reporting practices. Multivariate Behav Res 2016; 51 (06) 881-898 . Doi: 10.1080/00273171.2016.1228042
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 2015; 67 (01) 1-48 . Doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rattray J, Jones MC. Essential elements of questionnaire design and development. J Clin Nurs 2007; 16 (02) 234-243 . Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01573.x
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Jackson JL, Chamberlin J, Kroenke K. Predictors of patient satisfaction. Soc Sci Med 2001; 52 (04) 609-620 . Doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00164-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Fitzpatrick R. Surveys of patients satisfaction: I--Important general considerations. BMJ 1991; 302 (6781): 887-889 . Doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6781.887
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Biro MA, Yelland JS, Brown SJ. Who is holding the baby? Women's experiences of contact with their baby immediately after birth: An Australian population-based survey. Women Birth 2015; 28 (04) 317-322 . Doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2015.05.001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Christiaens W, Bracke P. Assessment of social psychological determinants of satisfaction with childbirth in a cross-national perspective. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2007; 7: 26 . Doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-7-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Stevens NR, Wallston KA, Hamilton NA. Perceived control and maternal satisfaction with childbirth: a measure development study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 33 (01) 15-24 . Doi: 10.3109/0167482X.2011.652996
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 d'Orsi E, Brüggemann OM, Diniz CS. , et al. Social inequalities and women's satisfaction with childbirth care in Brazil: a national hospital-based survey. Cad Saude Publica 2014; 30 (Suppl. 01) S1-S15 . Doi: 10.1590/0102-311X00087813
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Grigoryan R, Thompson ME, Crape B, Hekimian K. Explaining women's high satisfaction with objectively poor quality childbirth services: Armenia as a case study. Health Care Women Int 2015; 36 (01) 121-134 . Doi: 10.1080/07399332.2014.946507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hodnett ED. Pain and women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (5, Suppl Nature) S160-S172 . Doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(02)70189-0
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gungor I, Beji NK. Development and psychometric testing of the scales for measuring maternal satisfaction in normal and caesarean birth. Midwifery 2012; 28 (03) 348-357 . Doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2011.03.009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Declercq E. Childbirth in Brazil: challenging an interventionist paradigm. Birth 2015; 42 (01) 1-4 . Doi: 10.1111/birt.12156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar