Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of the Malaysian Version of Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale among Cardiovascular Patients Undergoing Major Surgery


Cardiovascular patients
Confirmatory factor analysis
Ottawa decisional conflict scale
Patient decision making
Validation study


How to Cite

Lee Peng, K. ., Tang, . L. Y., Chin Jerk, N. ., Mohajer, S., & Namazi Nia, M. . (2022). Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of the Malaysian Version of Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale among Cardiovascular Patients Undergoing Major Surgery. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal, 24(8). https://doi.org/10.32592/ircmj.2022.24.8.1871


Background: The Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (ODCS) is one of the initiatives developed to determine the information about the patient's decision and the factor that influence the decision made. Therefore, a systematic and structured process of decision-making can express the difficult action to be taken by patients.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Malaysian version of ODCS among cardiovascular patients undergoing major surgery.

Methods: This study used the forward-backward translation method to develop an instrument that enabled Malaysians to know about this variable. Therefore, the researcher decided to make a transcultural adaptation and evaluate the decision-making of the Malaysia version of the ODCS, which seeks information about decision-making and the factors that influence the choices made. This study was conducted from January 2015 to July 2016 through a convincing sampling of 520 cardiovascular patients who need to undergo major surgery with a focus on decision-making regarding the diseases.

Results: The results obtained on the reliability tests showed good internal consistency for all items (Cronbach α=0.914-0.917). From the analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy was 0.886, while the significant value of Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was P<0.001. Therefore, the analysis concluded that the data were appropriate for principal component analysis.

Conclusion: The psychometric properties of the Malaysian version of the ODCS are considered appropriate to be administered to patients who need to undergo cardiac surgery. Patients' provision of information was able to decrease decisional conflict among them with cardiovascular disease.



Keskinbora KH. Medical ethics considerations on artificial intelligence. J Clin Neurosci. 2019;64:277-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2019.03.001. [PubMed: 30878282]

Rafii F, Soleimani M, Seyed-Fatemi N. Concept analysis of participation of patient with chronic disease: Use of hybrid model. Iran J Nurs Res. 2010;23(67):35-48.

Stiggelbout AM, Van der Weijden T, De Wit MPT, Frosch D, Legare F, Montori VM, et al. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ. 2012;344:256. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e256. . [PubMed: 22286508]

Chiu E-C, Lee Y, Lai KY, Kuo CJ, Lee SC, Hsieh CL. Construct validity of the chinese version of the activities of daily

living rating scale III in patients with schizophrenia. Plos One. 2015;10(6):1-12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130702. [PubMed: 26121246]

O’Connor A. User manual-decisional conflict scale. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 1993.

Garvelink MM, Boland L, Klein K, Nguyen DV, Menear M, Bekker HL, et al. Decisional conflict scale findings among patients and surrogates making health decisions: part II of an anniversary review. Med Decis Making. 2019;39(4):315-26. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19851346. [PubMed: 31142205]

Stacey D, Legare F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014:28(1):001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4. [PubMed: 24470076]

O'Connor AM, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Flood AB. Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: shared decision making using patient decision aids: a review of the evidence base for shared decision making. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(2):63-72. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.var.63. [PubMed: 15471770]

Makaryus AN, Friedman EA. Patients' understanding of their treatment plans and diagnosis at discharge. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005;80(8):991-4. doi: 10.4065/80.8.991. [PubMed: 16092576]

Amsterlaw J, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. Can avoidance of complications lead to biased healthcare decisions? 2006.

Huang R, Gionfriddo M, Zhang L, Leppin AL, Ting HH, Montori VM. Shared decision-making in the People’s republic of China: current status and future directions. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;

:1129-41. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S82110. [PubMed: 26273201]

Gascon MRP, Ribeiro CM, Bueno LMA, Benute GRG, Lucia MCSd, Rivitti EA, et al. Prevalence of depression and anxiety disorders in hospitalized patients at the dermatology clinical ward of a university hospital. An Bras Dermatol. 2012;87(3):403-7. doi: 10.1590/s0365-05962012000300008. [PubMed: 22714755]

Gupta M. Engaging employees at work: insights from

India. Adv Dev Hum Resour. 2018;20(1):3-10. doi: 10.1177%2F1523422317741690.

Brehaut JC, O'Connor AM, Wood TJ, Hack TF, Siminoff L, Gordon E, et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making. 2003;23(4):281-92. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03256005. [PubMed: 12926578]

Cranney A, O’Connor AM, Jacobsen MJ, Tugwell P, Adachi JD, Ooi DS, et al. Development and pilot testing of a decision aid for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;47(3):245-55. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(01)00218-x. [PubMed: 12088603]

Lu C, Mu W, Jin Yh, Shi Yx, Li G, Li Y, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric assessment of the statement format Decisional Conflict Scale for Mandarin version. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1-9. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4717-6. [PubMed: 31752845]

Legare F, O'Connor AC, Graham I, Saucier D, Cote L, Cauchon M, et al. Supporting patients facing difficult health care decisions: use of the ottawa decision support framework. Can Fam Physician. 2006;52(4):476-7. [PubMed: 17327891]

Zhang N, Fielding R, Soong I, Chan KK, Lee C, Ng A, et al. Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the brief illness perception questionnaire in breast cancer survivors. Plos One. 2017;12(3):1-10. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174093. [PubMed: 28319160]

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1-12. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4. [PubMed: 8721797]

Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J. R. Stat. Soc. 1996;58(1):267-88. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x.

Parahoo K. Nursing research: principles, process and is sties. Palgrave Macmillan; 2006.

Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: Principles and methods. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.

Polit DF, Beck CT, Hungler BP. Essentials of nursing research Methods, appraisal and utilization. Philadelphia (USA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006;12:457-94.

O'Connor AM, Drake ER, Wells GA, Tugwell P, Laupacis A, Elmslie T. A survey of the decision‐making needs of Canadians faced with complex health decisions. Health Expect. 2003;6(2):97-109. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00215.x. [PubMed: 12752738]

O’Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Moulton BW, Sepucha KR, et al. Toward the ‘tipping point’: decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff. 2007;26(3):716-25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.716. [PubMed: 17485749]

O'Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making. 1995;15(1):25-30. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9501500105. [PubMed: 7898294]

O'Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, Elmslie T, Jolly E, Hollingworth G, et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Couns. 1998;33(3):267-79. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(98)00026-3. [PubMed: 9731164]