Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR)

Williams, Julie; Leamy, Mary; Pesola, Francesca; Bird, Victoria; Le Boutillier, Clair; Slade, Mike

Abstract

Background: Supporting recovery is the aim of national mental health policy in many countries, including England. There is a need for standardised measures of recovery, to assess policy implementation and inform clinical practice. Only one measure of recovery has been developed in England: the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) which measures recovery from the perspective of adult mental health service users with a psychosis diagnosis.
Aims: To independently evaluate the psychometric properties of the 15-item and 22-item versions of QPR.
Method: Two samples were used: Dataset 1 (n=88) involved assessment of QPR at baseline, two weeks and three months. Dataset 2 (n=399; ISRCTN02507940) involved assessment of QPR at baseline and one year.
Results: For the 15-item version, internal consistency was 0.89, convergent validity was 0.73, test-retest reliability was 0.74 and sensitivity to change was 0.40. Confirmatory factor analysis showed the 15-item version offered a good fit. For the 22 item version comprising two sub-scales, the Interpersonal sub-scale was found to under-perform and the Intrapersonal sub-scale overlaps substantially with the 15 item version. Conclusions: Both the 15-item and the Intrapersonal sub-scale of the 22-item versions of the QPR demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties. The 15-item version is slightly more robust and also less burdensome, so it can be recommended for use in research and clinical practice.
Declaration of interest: None.

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Dec 1, 2015
• Deposit Date: Dec 10, 2015
• Publicly Available Date: Dec 10, 2015
• Journal: British Journal of Psychiatry
• Print ISSN: 0007-1250
• Electronic ISSN: 1472-1465
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 207
• Issue: 6
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.114.161695
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/765155
• Publisher URL: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/207/6/551
• Additional Information: This is an author-produced electronic version of an article accepted for publication in the British Journal of Psychiatry. The definitive publisher-authenticated version is available online at http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/207/6/551