Development of the Japanese version of the general practice assessment questionnaire: measurement of patient experience and testing of data quality.

BACKGROUND

Physicians' interpersonal performance is critical in medical practice, especially primary care practice. The General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ) was developed in the United Kingdom to evaluate the quality of primary care from the viewpoint of patients. This questionnaire highlights the evaluation of interpersonal skills and interactions between physicians and patients. Though several other tools also exist to evaluate primary care quality, the GPAQ has several distinctive evaluation items, covering receptionists, access to primary care, and enablement (patients' understanding of self-care and of their own health after consultation). Our purpose was to develop and validate a Japanese version of the GPAQ.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study tested the validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the questionnaire. We translated the original GPAQ into Japanese and assessed its reliability and validity among patients aged ≥20 years at five rural primary care centres located in Shimane and Okayama prefectures, Japan. We also examined its internal reliability using Cronbach's alpha coefficient and construct validity-including item-scale correlations, item-other scale correlations, and inter-scale correlations. Moreover, we examined correlations between each score and overall satisfaction using Spearman's correlation coefficient for criterion-related validity.

RESULTS

The translated version of the GPAQ was administered, and we received 252 responses (mean age: 68 ± 12.3 years, male: 42.9%); all data were analysed. The translated questionnaire showed good reliability and validity, with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.79-0.92 for all scales, and satisfactory item-scale, item-other scale, and inter-scale correlations. Correlations with overall satisfaction were strong (Spearman's correlation coefficients: 0.31-0.38) for all scales except 'continuity of care'.

CONCLUSIONS

The Japanese version of the GPAQ was acceptable, reliable, and valid. This could be a useful instrument to evaluate key areas of primary care performance in Japan, particularly physicians' communication skills. Further work is required to evaluate its utility in urban areas.