A psychometric validation of the decisional conflict scale in italian cancer patients scheduled for insertion of central venous access devices

Background/Aim: In oncological settings, high-quality decision-making takes place when an adaptive pattern of cognitive and behavioural processes occurs, potentially limiting post-decisional regret and leading to an increment of adherence to the final decision. An example of a choice that requires a patient’s involvement in the decision-making during cancer treatment occurs when the insertion of Central Vascular Access Device (CVAD) is proposed for chemotherapy administration. The aim of the current study was to develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), including its factorial structure and its accuracy in discriminating the level of uncertainty in a sample of cancer patients during their decision-making process for the insertion of a CVAD for intravenous (IV) chemotherapy administration. Materials and Methods: The study included 264 cancer patients with different diagnoses. To test the structural and psychometric properties of the Italian version of the DCS (DCS-ITA), exploratory factorial analysis was conducted followed by traditional classical test theory assessments of internal reliability and criterion validity. Results: The Italian version of the DCS (DCS-ITA) demonstrated good internal consistency, acceptable construct validity, which was tested with exploratory factorial analysis, and good criterion validity, demonstrated by the ability of the scale to differentiate between patients who declared themselves certain about their choice and patients expressing uncertainty about the choice to make. Conclusion: Overall, the results of the study showed that the DCS-ITA is a psychometrically sound instrument that easily discriminates between patients who are experiencing a decisional conflict and those who are not. The DCS-ITA can be used as a valid and easy-to-use tool for the screening of the decisional conflict in oncological settings