Aims: The short version of the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS) has 33 items of Likert type whose answers vary from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree), and is used to assess the grief after perinatal loss and to identify women at major need of specific support. This is the first attempt to validate an Italian version of PGS. Materials and methods: The English version of PGS by Potvin et al. was translated into Italian by a professional mother tongue English translator. The survey was administered at 3 different times (translated Italian version; original English version after 10 days; and same Italian version after other 10 days) to 16 Italian/English bilingual women who had experienced a perinatal loss. The reproducibility among the three administrations and concordance were assessed using Cronbach's alpha and Cohen's kappa, respectively. Results: Considering the PGS, median score ranged from 74.5 (58.5–94.5) to 78 (64–95), with no significant difference among the three questionnaire administrations (p = 0.616). No significant difference emerged among the three administered questionnaires for subscales (p = 0.095, 0.410 and 0.410 for ‘active grief’ AG, ‘difficulty in coping’ DC and ‘despair’ D scores, respectively). Concordance varied from good to very good among all questionnaire administrations. Conclusions: This Italian version of the PGS can be used by clinicians to assess Italian women's responses to stillbirth and perinatal loss, as well as by researchers for research purposes.

Italian translation and validation of the Perinatal Grief Scale / Ravaldi C.; Bettiol A.; Crescioli G.; Lombardi N.; Biffino M.; Romeo G.; Levi M.; Bonaiuti R.; Vannacci A.. - In: SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CARING SCIENCES. - ISSN 0283-9318. - STAMPA. - 34:(2020), pp. 684-689. [10.1111/scs.12772]

Italian translation and validation of the Perinatal Grief Scale

Ravaldi C.;Bettiol A.;Crescioli G.;Lombardi N.;Biffino M.;Bonaiuti R.;Vannacci A.
2020

Abstract

Aims: The short version of the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS) has 33 items of Likert type whose answers vary from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree), and is used to assess the grief after perinatal loss and to identify women at major need of specific support. This is the first attempt to validate an Italian version of PGS. Materials and methods: The English version of PGS by Potvin et al. was translated into Italian by a professional mother tongue English translator. The survey was administered at 3 different times (translated Italian version; original English version after 10 days; and same Italian version after other 10 days) to 16 Italian/English bilingual women who had experienced a perinatal loss. The reproducibility among the three administrations and concordance were assessed using Cronbach's alpha and Cohen's kappa, respectively. Results: Considering the PGS, median score ranged from 74.5 (58.5–94.5) to 78 (64–95), with no significant difference among the three questionnaire administrations (p = 0.616). No significant difference emerged among the three administered questionnaires for subscales (p = 0.095, 0.410 and 0.410 for ‘active grief’ AG, ‘difficulty in coping’ DC and ‘despair’ D scores, respectively). Concordance varied from good to very good among all questionnaire administrations. Conclusions: This Italian version of the PGS can be used by clinicians to assess Italian women's responses to stillbirth and perinatal loss, as well as by researchers for research purposes.
2020
34
684
689
Goal 3: Good health and well-being for people
Ravaldi C.; Bettiol A.; Crescioli G.; Lombardi N.; Biffino M.; Romeo G.; Levi M.; Bonaiuti R.; Vannacci A.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Ravaldi-2019-Italian-translation-and-validation-.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Version of record)
Licenza: Open Access
Dimensione 322.67 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
322.67 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/1193882
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact