Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Pharmaceutical Administration and Pharmacoeconomics Research Center (PAPRC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Pharmaceutical Administration and Pharmacoeconomics Research Center (PAPRC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Department of Health Management and Economics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Knowledge Utilization Research Centre, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Department of Biostatistics, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Economics, Allameh‑Tabatabaiee University of Human Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Objective: To develop a valid and reliable instrument in the Persian language for 
evaluating patient satisfaction with services provided in community pharmacies.
Methods: We selected a valid and reliable instrument from the literature and translated 
it to the Persian language. Some new items were added to the first draft based on the 
special characteristics of the Iranian health system. Then, the feasibility of utilizing 
the new instrument was assessed. In the third step, we conducted a formal content 
validity study to calculate content validity indices. Having completed the content validity 
study, the factorial structure of new instruments was determined by implementing a 
factorial analysis. Finally, the reliability of the instrument was assessed by assessment 
of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and test‑retest reliability.
Findings: The developed instrument demonstrated suitable validity and reliability. 
The final instrument showed desirable content validity, with inter‑rater agreement 
of 94% and 97% for relevance and clarity, respectively. Scale content validity 
indices for relevance and clarity were calculated as 96% and 92%, respectively, and 
comprehensiveness was calculated as 100%. Factor analysis resulted in seven factors 
with a cumulative variance of 62.14%. In internal consistency reliability, Cronbach’s 
alpha for the whole instrument was 0.912. About test‑retest reliability, six items showed 
“almost perfect” agreement, 18 items showed “substantial” agreement, and three 
items showed “moderate” agreement. Therefore, test‑retest reliability assessment too 
demonstrated appropriate results.
Conclusion: The instrument demonstrated excellent validity and reliability for 
application in Iran. This instrument is useful for evaluating patient satisfaction with 
services provided in community pharmacies in the Persian‑speaking communities.


1. SchommerJC, Kucukarslan SN. Measuring patient satisfaction 
with pharmaceutical services. Am J Health Syst Pharm 
2. Donabedian A. Criteria and standards for quality assessment 
and monitoring. QRB Qual Rev Bull 1986;12:99‑108.
3. Naik Panvelkar P, Saini B, Armour C. Measurement of patient 
satisfaction with community pharmacy services: A review. 
Pharm World Sci 2009;31:525‑37.
4. Traverso ML, Salamano M, Botta C, Colautti M, Palchik V, 
Pérez B. Questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction with 
pharmaceutical care in Spanish language. Int J Qual Health 
Care 2007;19:217‑24.
5. DonabedianA. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank 
Mem Fund Q 1966;44:166‑206.
6. Ware JE Jr., Snyder MK, Wright WR, Davies AR. Defining 
and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care. Eval 
Program Plann 1983;6:247‑63.
7. MacKeigan LD, Larson LN. Development and validation of 
an instrument to measure patient satisfaction with pharmacy 
services. Med Care 1989;27:522‑36.
8. Larson LN, MacKeigan LD. Further validation of an 
instrument to measure patient satisfaction with pharmacy 
services. J Pharm Mark Manage 1994;8:125‑39.
9. Larson LN, Rovers JP, MacKeigan LD. Patient satisfaction with 
pharmaceutical care: Update of a validated instrument. J Am 
Pharm Assoc (Wash) 2002;42:44‑50.
10. Kradjan WA, Schulz R, Christensen DB, Stergachis A, 
Sullivan S, Fullerton DS, et al. Patients’ perceived benefit from 
and satisfaction with asthma‑related pharmacy services. JAm 
Pharm Assoc (Wash) 1999;39:658‑66.
11. Arab M, Rashidian A, Pourreza A, Tajvar M, Nemati RK, 
Sari AA, et al. Developing a Persian inpatient satisfaction 
questionnaire. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2014;27:4‑14.
12. Hashemi‑Meshkini A, Varmaghani M, Yousefi M, 
Yaghoubifard S, Zekri HS, Nikfar S, et al. From generic scheme 
to brand‑generic scheme: Have new policy influenced the 
efficiency of Iranian pharmaceutical companies? J Res Pharm 
Pract 2014;3:88‑93.
13. Varmaghani M, Meshkini AH, Farzadfar F, Yousefi M, 
Yaghoubifard S, Varahrami V, et al. Evaluation of productivity 
in Iranian pharmaceutical companies: A DEA‑based 
Malmquist approach and panel data analysis. J Res Pharm 
Pract 2015;4:51‑6.
14. Yaghoubifard S, RashidianA, KebriaeezadehA, Majdzadeh R, 
Hosseini SA, Akbari Sari A, et al. Developing a conceptual 
framework and a tool for measuring access to, and use of, 
medicines at household level (HH‑ATM tool). Public Health 
15. Kassam R, Collins JB, Berkowitz J. Developing anchored 
measures of patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care 
delivery: Experiences versus expectations. Patient Prefer 
Adherence 2009;3:113‑22.
16. Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from your 
panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res 1992;5:194‑7.
17. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: Are you sure you 
know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. 
Res Nurs Health 2006;29:489‑97.
18. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content 
validity. Nurs Res 1986;35:382‑5.
19. Grant JS, Davis LL. Selection and use of content experts for 
instrument development. Res Nurs Health 1997;20:269‑74.
20. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate 
Data Analysis. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1998.
21. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: 
A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 4th ed. 
New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
22. Lê Q, Spencer J, Whelan J. Development of a tool to evaluate 
health science students’ experiences of an interprofessional 
education (IPE) programme. Ann Acad Med Singapore 
23. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. 
New York: McGraw‑Hill; 1994.
24. Schutz AL, Counte MA, Meurer S. Development of a patient 
safety culture measurement tool for ambulatory health care 
settings: Analysis of content validity. Health Care Manag Sci 
25. Long D, Young J, Rickard CM, Mitchell ML. Measuring 
paediatric intensive care nursing knowledge in Australia and 
New Zealand: How the basic knowledge assessment tool for 
pediatric critical care nurses (PEDS‑BKAT4) performs. Aust 
Crit Care 2013;26:36‑42.
26. Nguyen C, Foster ER, Paciorkowski AR, Viehoever A, 
Considine C, Bondurant A, et al. Reliability and validity of 
the Wolfram Unified Rating Scale (WURS). Orphanet J Rare 
Dis 2012;7:89.
27. Oriá MO, Ximenes LB, de Almeida PC, Glick DF, Dennis CL. 
Psychometric assessment of the Brazilian version of the 
Breastfeeding Self‑Efficacy Scale. Public Health Nurs 
28. Albal E, Kutlu Y, Bilgin H. Psychometric properties of the 
Turkish version of the Depression Coping Self‑efficacy Scale. 
Nurs Health Sci 2010;12:415‑20.
29. Tuffrey C, Bateman BJ, ColverAC. The Questionnaire of Young