Abstract
BackgroundThe paper reports on a study to evaluate the psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness of the Chinese translation of the Admission Experience Survey (AES).MethodsThe AES was translated into Chinese and back-translated. Content validity was established by focus groups and expert panel review. The Chinese version of the Admission Experience Survey (C-AES) was administered to 135 consecutively recruited adult psychiatric patients in the Castle Peak Hospital (Hong Kong SAR, China) within 48 hours of admission. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the scores from patients admitted voluntarily versus patients committed involuntarily, and those received physical or chemical restraint versus those who did not. The relationship between admission experience and psychopathology was examined by correlating C-AES scores with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores.ResultsSpearman's item-to-total correlations of the C-AES ranged from 0.50 to 0.74. Three factors from the C-AES were extracted using factor analysis. Item 12 was omitted because of poor internal consistency and factor loading. The factor structure of the Process Exclusion Scale (C-PES) corresponded to the English version, while some discrepancies were noted in the Perceived Coercion Scale (C-PCS) and the Negative Pressure Scale (C-NPS). All subscales had good internal consistencies. Scores were significantly higher for patients either committed involuntarily or subjected to chemical or physical restrain, independent on severity of psychotic symptoms.ConclusionThe Chinese AES is a psychometrically sound instrument assessing the three different aspects of the experience of admission, namely "negative pressure, "process exclusion" and "perceived coercion". The potential of C-AES in exploring subjective experience of psychiatric admission and effects on treatment adherence should be further explored.
Highlights
The paper reports on a study to evaluate the psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness of the Chinese translation of the Admission Experience Survey (AES)
The results provided the basis to measure the face and construct validity of the Chinese version of the Admission Experience Survey (C-AES)
Factor 2 (Process exclusion scale, Cronbach's α = 0.77) 5 I got to say what I wanted about coming into the hospital 3 I had enough of a chance to say whether I wanted to come into the hospital 9 No one seemed to want to know whether I wanted to come into the hospital 13 My opinion about coming into the hospital didn't matter
Summary
The paper reports on a study to evaluate the psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness of the Chinese translation of the Admission Experience Survey (AES). Three subscales have been derived from this instrument, including the five-item Perceived Coercion Scale, which has been found to be a psychometrically sound and internally reliable measure of patient's perception of coercion [2,7] with satisfactory retest stability [11] It has been incorporated into cross-nation multi-centre studies [4,12,13,14]. The four-item Process Exclusion Scale measured patients' evaluation of the fairness of admission process, which is related to their perceptions of others' motives and whether their views being considered [5] Both process exclusion and negative pressure have been found to predict perceived coercion [15]. Despite healthcare professionals appeared to be the main source of pressure [17], it has been pointed out that if patients perceived they were treated in good faith with impartiality, they were more likely to view the hospital admission as fair and less likely to perceive coercion [1,18]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
