You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 3 Item and Scale characteristics after PCA with varimax rotation

From: Assessment of the quality of end-of-life care: translation and validation of the German version of the “Care of the Dying Evaluation” (CODE-GER) - a questionnaire for bereaved relatives

      Factor Loadings
Subcales and short description of items M SD Cronbachs’Alpha if item deleted per scale Item Scale Correlation F 1 F2 F 3 F 4 F 5 F 6 F 7
1 Support and time of doctors and nurses
α = 0.85; 14.6% Variance explained
 Nursing care – medicines and comfortable position 3.8 0.6 0.82 0.68 0.73       
 Nursing care- personal care needs 3.7 0.7 0.82 0.68 0.72       
 Confidence and trust in doctors 3.6 0.9 0.83 0.57 0.67       
 Time of doctors to listen and discuss the patient’s condition 3.5 0.9 0.82 0.69 0.66       
 Whether HCT did all they could to relieve pain 3.9 0.5 0.84 0.54 0.62       
 Whether HCT did all they could to control respiratory tract secretions 3.6 0.9 0.85 0.41 0.59       
 Confidence and trust in nurses 3.7 0.8 0.84 0.51 0.56       
 Whether HCT did all they could to relieve restlessness 3.6 0.9 0.83 0.56 0.47       
 Time of nurses to listen and discuss the patients’ condition 3.5 0.8 0.83 0.57 0.40 0.48      
2 Spiritual and emotional support
α = 0.82; 10.6% Variance explained
 Whether HCT met overall religious spiritual needs for patient 3.3 1.0 0.69 0.82   0.84      
 Whether HCT met overall religious spiritual needs for next-of-kin 3.3 1.1 0.72 0.77   0.81      
 Emotional support to next-of-kin 3.4 0.9 0.80 0.60   0.58      
 Whether ward was cleana 3.7 0.8 0.86 0.43   0.50      
3 Information and decision-making
α = 0.61; 8.5% Variance explained
 Difficulty of explanations of the patient’s condition 3.1 1.0 0.50 0.54    0.70     
 Involvement in decision-making 3.0 1.4 0.43 0.55    0.66     
 Whether discussion giving fluids through a ‘drip’ would have been helpful 3.2 1.6 0.62 0.28    0.62     
 Whether discussion of giving fluids through a ‘drip’ took place 1.8 2.0 0.62 0.34    0.52     0.41
4 Environment
α = 0.67; 8.2% Variance explained
 Whether the bed area had adequate privacy 3.6 0.8 0.37 0.65     0.85    
 Whether the bed area was comfortable 3.5 0.9 0.54 0.51     0.78    
 Whether patient died in the right placea 3.5 1.1 0.81 0.34     0.50    
5 Information about dying process
α = 0.68; 7.6% Variance explained
 Whether a discussion about what to expect during the dying process would have been helpful 2.9 1.8 0.51 0.55      0.75   
 Information about what to expect during the dying process of the patient 2.2 2.0 0.56 0.52      0.69   
 Information about the soon death of the patient 3.4 1.4 0.66 0.44      0.65   
6 Presence of symptoms
α = 0.58; 6.5% Variance explained
 Whether patient was restless 2.8 1.3 0.30 0.51       0.83  
 Whether patient had pain 3.0 1.3 0.46 0.40       0.76  
 Whether patient had retained respiratory tract secretions 2.7 1.4 0.65 0.28 0.42      0.47  
7 Support at actual time of death and afterwards
α = 0.59; 5.7% Variance explained
 Support at actual time of death 3.5 1.0   0.43        0.76
 Sensitivity of HCT after death 3.9 0.8   0.43 0.38       0.44
  1. Range of numeric item scorings: 0 to 4 (see Table 1). Although scaling differ between items, higher values are always associated with higher quality. Values in bold were critical and have been analysed individually in order to decide on item in−/exclusion; HCT = Health Care Team; a = items were deleted after analysis
Back to article page

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us