Validation of the Japanese version of the full and short form Trust in Oncologist Scale.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to validate the Japanese versions of the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS-J) and the TiOS-Short Form (TiOS-SF-J). METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among cancer patients in Japan. The forward-backward translation method was used to develop the TiOS-J. The web-based survey was mailed to 633 people, of whom 309 responded. After 2 weeks, 103 among the 156 first-time respondents completed the second survey to verify the reliability of the retest method. The validity was evaluated by exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Spearman's correlation coefficients between the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-Japanese, willingness to recommend the oncologist, trust in health care, and number of oncological consultations. To evaluate reliability, Cronbach's α and test-retest correlation were calculated. RESULTS: The theoretically driven four-factor model and the EFA-driven one-factor model of the full-form TiOS-J (18 items) did not result in an acceptable fit; however, CFA supported the one-dimensionality of the 5 items from the TiOS-SF-J (χ2 (5) = 12.36, p = 0.03, goodness-of-fit index = 0.984, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.952, comparative fit index = 0.991, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.069). With regard to the reliability of TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J, the Cronbach's alpha values were 0.94 and 0.89, respectively; the test-retest values were 0.82 and 0.78. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This study indicated that the TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J are valid and reliable instruments for measuring patients' trust in their oncologists and can be used to assess trust in oncologists for both clinical and research purposes.

Validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-J) for evaluating oncologist consultations.

Objective: To develop the Japanese version of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-J) and examine its validity and reliability. Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted among cancer patients in Japan. The PSQ-J was developed following the forward-backward translation method, using a numerical rating scale. Data on patient characteristics and psychometric scales, like the PSQ-J, willingness to recommend an oncologist to others, trust in the healthcare system, uncertainty, and the Physician Compassion Questionnaire were collected. Validity was examined using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and by calculating the correlations between the total PSQ-J score and the criterion variables. Reliability was confirmed by Cronbach's alpha and test-retest score correlations at a two-week interval. Results: The first and second surveys were conducted on 309 and 107 patients, respectively. One-dimensionality and model fit were verified using factor analyses. The PSQ-J was significantly associated with other comparable scales. Cronbach's alpha was 0.962; the correlation between the PSQ-J test-retest scores was 0.835 (p < .001). Conclusion: The current study indicates that the PSQ-J can be valid and reliable for assessing satisfaction with oncologist consultation. Innovation: The PSQ-J enables the effective assessment of patient satisfaction with oncologist consultations, leading to better practice reflecting the patient's viewpoint.