Volume 30, Issue 1 (March 2026)
Physiol Pharmacol 2026, 30(1): 38-47 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khatib A, Barkhordari-Sharifabad M, Pazhavand M M. Translation and psychometric evaluation of the
persian version of the treatment satisfaction
with medicines questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in
chronically-ill patients. Physiol Pharmacol 2026; 30 (1) :38-47
URL: http://ppj.phypha.ir/article-1-2499-en.html
URL: http://ppj.phypha.ir/article-1-2499-en.html
Abstract: (1870 Views)
Introduction: It is helpful to know the rate of satisfaction with treatment for predicting treatment adherence and compliance with medical advice. Thus, measuring this parameter is important both in daily clinical care and in biomedical research. Due to the unavailability of an instrument to evaluate treatment satisfaction with medicines in Persian, this study dealt with translating and psychometrically evaluating the Persian version of the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in chronically ill patients.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in two stages: translation and psychometric evaluation. After obtaining permission from the developer of the questionnaire, the process of translation was carried out based on Wild’s model (2005). Face validity (20 chronically-ill patients), qualitative content validity (10 experts), and construct validity including confirmatory factor analysis (225 chronically ill patients), were employed to establish the validity of the questionnaire. Further, the reliability of the instrument was established by determining the internal consistency and intra-class correlation (51 chronically ill patients). The data were analyzed using SPSS23 and LISREL8.5.
Results: To assess face and content validity, the questionnaire items underwent modifications based on feedback from patients and experts. According to confirmatory factor analysis, the fit index values demonstrated an appropriate alignment between the model and data. The subscales’ Cronbach’s α coefficients ranged from 0.905 to 0.985, while the entire questionnaire’s Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.875. Additionally, the test-retest reliability, as measured via the intra-class correlation coefficient, was determined to be 0.739 over two weeks.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the SATMED-Q has appropriate face, content, construct, and criterion-referenced validity as well as reliability for assessing treatment satisfaction with medicines in chronically ill patients. It is also advisable to use it in clinical studies, clinical settings, education, and management.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in two stages: translation and psychometric evaluation. After obtaining permission from the developer of the questionnaire, the process of translation was carried out based on Wild’s model (2005). Face validity (20 chronically-ill patients), qualitative content validity (10 experts), and construct validity including confirmatory factor analysis (225 chronically ill patients), were employed to establish the validity of the questionnaire. Further, the reliability of the instrument was established by determining the internal consistency and intra-class correlation (51 chronically ill patients). The data were analyzed using SPSS23 and LISREL8.5.
Results: To assess face and content validity, the questionnaire items underwent modifications based on feedback from patients and experts. According to confirmatory factor analysis, the fit index values demonstrated an appropriate alignment between the model and data. The subscales’ Cronbach’s α coefficients ranged from 0.905 to 0.985, while the entire questionnaire’s Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.875. Additionally, the test-retest reliability, as measured via the intra-class correlation coefficient, was determined to be 0.739 over two weeks.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the SATMED-Q has appropriate face, content, construct, and criterion-referenced validity as well as reliability for assessing treatment satisfaction with medicines in chronically ill patients. It is also advisable to use it in clinical studies, clinical settings, education, and management.
Keywords: Translation, psychometric evaluation, Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines, chronically-ill patients
Type of Manuscript: Clinical research article |
Subject:
Clinical Physiology/Pharmacology
References
1. Algoso M, Peters K, Ramjan L, East L. Adaptation and validation of a survey instrument measuring perceived preparedness of nursing graduates. Nurse Researcher 2016; 23. [DOI:10.7748/nr.2016.e1437]
2. Amirrudin M, Nasution K, Supahar S. Effect of variability on Cronbach alpha reliability in research practice. Jurnal Matematika, Statistika dan Komputasi 2021; 17: 223-230. [DOI:10.20956/jmsk.v17i2.11655]
3. Atkinson M J, Sinha A, Hass S L, Colman S S, Kumar R N, Brod M, et al. Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2004; 2: 1-13. [DOI:10.1186/1477-7525-2-12]
4. Bolsinger J, Jaeger M, Hoff P, Theodoridou A. Challenges and opportunities in building and maintaining a good therapeutic relationship in acute psychiatric settings: A narrative review. Frontiers in Psychiatry 2020; 10: 965. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00965]
5. Clayton S, Czellar S, Nartova-Bochaver S, Skibins J C, Salazar G, Tseng Y-C, et al. Cross-cultural validation of a revised environmental identity scale. Sustainability 2021; 13: 2387. [DOI:10.3390/su13042387]
6. Connolly M, McLean S, Guerin S, Walsh G, Barrett A, Ryan K. Development and initial psychometric properties of a questionnaire to assess competence in palliative care: palliative care competence framework questionnaire. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® 2018; 35: 1304-1308. [DOI:10.1177/1049909118772565]
7. Delestras S, Roustit M, Bedouch P, Minoves M, Dobremez V, Mazet R, et al. Comparison between two generic questionnaires to assess satisfaction with medication in chronic diseases. PloS One 2013; 8: e56247. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0056247]
8. DeVellis R F, Thorpe C T. Scale development: Theory and applications: Sage Publications, 2021.
9. Dhalwani N N, Fahami R, Sathanapally H, Seidu S, Davies M J, Khunti K. Association between polypharmacy and falls in older adults: a longitudinal study from England. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e016358. [DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016358]
10. Ebrahimoghli R, Janati A, Gharaee H, Aghaei M H. Polypharmacy pattern in Iran: a comprehensive analysis of a large prescription database. Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research 2023; 21: e131304. [DOI:10.5812/ijpr-131304]
11. Fereidouni Sarijeh P, Khatib A. The Impact of Resurrection Beliefs on Resilience and Loneliness among Elderly Individuals in Tehran. Evidence Based Care 2025; 15: 46-53. https://10.0.86.22/EBCJ.2025.84011.3059
12. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1993; 46: 1417-1432. [DOI:10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N]
13. Jain V. 3D model of attitude. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences 2014; 3: 1-12.
14. Khatib A, Gazerani A, Fereidouni Sarijeh P, Pazhavand M, ebrahimi M a, Ranjbari B. Resilience and loneliness among older adults: an analysis using decision tree techniques. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 2026; 38: 2-8. [DOI:10.1007/s40520-025-03266-3]
15. Lenderking W R. Brief reflections on treatment satisfaction. Value in Health 2005; 8: S2-S5. [DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00068.x]
16. Levine T R. Confirmatory factor analysis. The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication 2015: 1-5. [DOI:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic183]
17. López-Torres López J, Rabanales-Sotos J, López-Torres Hidalgo M R, Milián García R M, López Martínez C, Blázquez Abellán G. Reliability and validity of the treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in persons with arterial hypertension. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2021; 18: 3212. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph18063212]
18. Lovric M. International encyclopedia of statistical science. Springer Nature 2011. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2]
19. Munro B H. Statistical methods for health care research. Vol 1: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005.
20. Pett M. Making sense of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks 2003. [DOI:10.4135/9781412984898]
21. Pound P, Britten N, Morgan M, Yardley L, Pope C, Daker-White G, et al. Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking. Social Science & Medicine 2005; 61: 133-155. [DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.063]
22. Reeve E, Wiese M D, Hendrix I, Roberts M S, Shakib S. People’s attitudes, beliefs, and experiences regarding polypharmacy and willingness to deprescribe. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2013; 61: 1508-1514. [DOI:10.1111/jgs.12418]
23. Ruiz M A, Pardo A, Rejas J, Soto J, Villasante F, Aranguren J L. Development and validation of the “treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire”(SATMED-Q)©. Value in Health 2008; 11: 913-926. [DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00323.x]
24. Sharma S. Nursing research and statistics-e-book: Elsevier Health Sciences, 2022.
25. Shokri A, Yazdan Panah A, Vahdat S. The professional relationship between the nurses and physicians from their own point of view. Journal of Health and Care 2013; 15: 76-69.
26. Skou S, Mair F, Fortin M, Guthrie B, Nunes B, Miranda J, et al. Multimorbidity. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2022; 8(1):48. [DOI:10.1038/s41572-022-00376-4]
27. Souza A C d, Alexandre N M C, Guirardello E d B. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude 2017; 26: 649-659. [DOI:10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022]
28. Świątoniowska-Lonc N, Kołtuniuk A, Jankowska-Polańska B. Psychometric properties of the treatment satisfaction with medicines questionnaire (SATMED-Q) in patients with diabetes, arterial hypertension and heart failure. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2022; 19: 1088. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph19031088]
29. Taghizadeh Z, Ebadi A, Montazeri A, Shahvari Z, Tavousi M, Bagherzadeh R. Psychometric properties of health related measures. Part 1: Translation, development, and content and face validity. Payesh (Health Monitor) 2017; 16: 343-357.
30. Tsai T-I, Luck L, Jefferies D, Wilkes L. Challenges in adapting a survey: ensuring cross-cultural equivalence. Nurse Researcher 2024; 32.
31. Twigg M J, Bhattacharya D, Clark A, Patel R, Rogers H, Whiteside H, et al. What do patients need to know? A study to assess patients’ satisfaction with information about medicines. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice 2016; 24: 229-236. [DOI:10.1111/ijpp.12252]
32. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health 2005; 8: 94-104. [DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x]
33. Williams B. Patient satisfaction: a valid concept? Social Science & Medicine 1994; 38: 509-516. [DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90247-X]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
