RMHP_A_290111 1319..1326

1OPEN – Open Patient Data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense C, DK-5000, Denmark; 2Danish Patient Compensation Association, Copenhagen V, DK-1560, Denmark Purpose: The study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the English version of the HCAT to produce a Danish HCAT version and to test the Danish version’s reliability. Methods: We used best-practice guidelines for linguistic translations and cultural adaptations. For cross-cultural adaptation, we conducted forward and back translation followed by expert committee review. Subsequently, two researchers assessed 140 complaint cases to test intraand inter-rater reliability of the Danish HCAT version. We used descriptive statistics for distributions and tested for differences between English and Danish editions Intraand inter-rater reliability used Gwet’s AC1 statistics, applying quadratic weights to assign more weight to large discrepancies. Results: The back translations showed both semantic and conceptual differences, and the expert committee thus discussed the meaning of the wording in the HCAT guide and coding form to ensure that the Danish version would be conceptually similar to the English version but also culturally appropriate for Danish settings. There was discussion about how to use the coding form to graduate problem severity, and this led to some altered wording. Pilot testing revealed the need for two new categories of “hospital-acquired infection” and “involvement of patients’ relatives”. The problem categories of the HCAT-DK showed “substantial” intraand inter-rater reliability (0.79, and 0.79 to 0.85). In addition, there was a “substantial” agreement (0.70 to 0.73) between the original HCAT and the HCAT-DK version. Conclusion: The study translated and cross-culturally adapted the English HCAT version to produce a Danish HCAT version. Cultural and conceptual differences led to adjustments and to addition of two extra items in the HCAT-DK. The Danish version showed “substantial” intraand inter-rater reliability and is considered suitable for coding complaint and compensation cases in Danish health care.

[1]  A. Gillespie,et al.  Learning from complaints in healthcare: a realist review of academic literature, policy evidence and front-line insights , 2020, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[2]  Jonas Harder Kerring,et al.  Healthcare Complaints Analysis Tool: reliability testing on a sample of Danish patient compensation claims , 2019, BMJ Open.

[3]  M. Marshall,et al.  Patient and public involvement in medical performance processes: A systematic review , 2018, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[4]  A. Gillespie,et al.  Patient‐Centered Insights: Using Health Care Complaints to Reveal Hot Spots and Blind Spots in Quality and Safety , 2018, The Milbank quarterly.

[5]  O. von dem Knesebeck,et al.  Are health care inequalities unfair? A study on public attitudes in 23 countries , 2016, International Journal for Equity in Health.

[6]  A. Gillespie,et al.  The Healthcare Complaints Analysis Tool: development and reliability testing of a method for service monitoring and organisational learning , 2016, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[7]  Alex Gillespie,et al.  Patient complaints in healthcare systems: a systematic review and coding taxonomy , 2014, BMJ quality & safety.

[8]  A. Darzi,et al.  Patients’ attitudes towards patient involvement in safety interventions: results of two exploratory studies , 2013, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[9]  J. Kragstrup,et al.  Characteristics of complaints resulting in disciplinary actions against Danish GPs , 2013, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[10]  P. Kent,et al.  Translation and discriminative validation of the STarT Back Screening Tool into Danish , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[11]  K. Gwet.  Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. , 2008, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[12]  A. Jensen,et al.  [Criteria validation of the Roland Morris questionnaire. A Danish translation of the international scale for the assessment of functional level in patients with low back pain and sciatica]. , 2003, Ugeskrift for laeger.

[13]  A Coulter,et al.  Patient safety: what about the patient? , 2002, Quality & safety in health care.

[14]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. , 2000, Spine.

[15]  M Sullivan,et al.  Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[16]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.