ORIGINAL PAPER
Translation and validation of the Polish-language version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) and its relationship to the type of delivery and the baby’s Apgar score
1
Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
2
Department of Midwifery, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland
3
Department of Quality of Life Research, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
4
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
5
Institute for Health and Wellbeing, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, UK
Submission date: 2024-01-01
Final revision date: 2024-03-14
Acceptance date: 2024-03-19
Online publication date: 2024-06-19
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
quality of life and well beingresearch methodology, measurement, and statistics in health psychology
ABSTRACT
Background:
Maternal birth experience is being increasingly recognised as a key clinical outcome parameter. The Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) is a short self-report measure designed to assess birth experience. The current investigation sought to trans-late the BSS-R into Polish and validate this version of the BSS-R (PL-BSS-R).
Participants and procedure:
The BSS-R was translated into Polish by an expert panel using forward and backward translation. A complex within-subjects design with an embedded between-subjects component was used to determine the key psychometric characteristics of the PL-BSS-R. Two hundred ninety-four Polish-speaking women in Poland completed the follow-up component of the study where the PL-BSS-R was administered. The PL-BSS-R measurement properties were examined using confirmatory factor analysis, divergent, convergent validity analysis, internal consistency appraisal and investigation of known-groups discriminant characteristics.
Results:
The PL-BSS-R was found to have generally very good measurement properties and to be equivalent to the original English-language version across key validity indices. The PL-BBS-R was found to be significantly correlated with neonatal physical health immediately postpartum and differed across delivery modes.
Conclusions:
The PL-BSS-R is a psychometrically robust measure of birth experience appropriate for clinical and research use within Po-land. Important associations were noted between subjective maternal birth experience and objective measures of neonatal physical health, indicating a critically important future research direction.
Maternal birth experience is being increasingly recognised as a key clinical outcome parameter. The Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) is a short self-report measure designed to assess birth experience. The current investigation sought to trans-late the BSS-R into Polish and validate this version of the BSS-R (PL-BSS-R).
Participants and procedure:
The BSS-R was translated into Polish by an expert panel using forward and backward translation. A complex within-subjects design with an embedded between-subjects component was used to determine the key psychometric characteristics of the PL-BSS-R. Two hundred ninety-four Polish-speaking women in Poland completed the follow-up component of the study where the PL-BSS-R was administered. The PL-BSS-R measurement properties were examined using confirmatory factor analysis, divergent, convergent validity analysis, internal consistency appraisal and investigation of known-groups discriminant characteristics.
Results:
The PL-BSS-R was found to have generally very good measurement properties and to be equivalent to the original English-language version across key validity indices. The PL-BBS-R was found to be significantly correlated with neonatal physical health immediately postpartum and differed across delivery modes.
Conclusions:
The PL-BSS-R is a psychometrically robust measure of birth experience appropriate for clinical and research use within Po-land. Important associations were noted between subjective maternal birth experience and objective measures of neonatal physical health, indicating a critically important future research direction.
REFERENCES (72)
1.
Adamska, I., Baranowska, B., Doroszewska, A., Pietrusiewicz, J., Godlewska, M., Kuźnicka-Błaszkowska, D., & Kucharska-Kwiatek, A. (2022). Opieka okołoporodowa podczas pandemii COVID-19 w świetle doświadczeń ko-biet i personelu medycznego [Perinatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the light of the experiences of women and medical personnel]. Fundacja Rodzić po Ludzku. Retrieved from https://rodzicpoludzku.pl/mate....
2.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2015). The Apgar score. Committee Opinion No. 644. Ob-stetrics and Gynecology, 126, e52–e55. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.00....
3.
Apgar, V. (1953). A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant. Current Researches in Anes-thesia and Analgesia, 32, 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b....
4.
Baranowska, B., Doroszewska, A., Kubicka-Kraszyńska, U., Pietrusiewicz, J., Adamska-Sala, I., Kajdy, A., Sys, D., Tataj-Puzyna, U., Bączek, G., & Crowther, S. (2019a). Is there respectful maternity care in Poland? Women’s views about care during labor and birth. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19, 520. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884....
5.
Baranowska, B., Kościk, E., Baczek, G., Tataj-Puzyna, U., Krauze, M., Sys, D., & Pięta, B. (2019b). Jakościowa ana-liza działań stowarzyszenia niezależna inicjatywa rodziców i położnych „dobrze urodzeni” na rzecz wspierania pozytywnego doświadczenia porodowego [Well born! – analysis of actions of independent initiative of parents’ and midwifes’ for support of positive birth experience]. Polski Przegląd Nauk o Zdrowiu, 2, 120–126. https://doi.org/10.20883/ppnoz....
6.
Barbosa-Leiker, C., Fleming, S., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2015). Psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) for US mothers. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 33, 504–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
7.
Bell, A. F., Andersson, E., Goding, K., & Vonderheid, S. C. (2018). The birth experience and maternal caregiving attitudes and behavior: a systematic review. Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, 16, 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc....
8.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2....
9.
Bonifay, W. E., Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., & Meijer, R. R. (2015). When are multidimensional data unidimensional enough for structural equation modeling? An evaluation of the DETECT multidimensionality index. Structural Equation Modeling, 22, 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/107055....
10.
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910....
11.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
12.
Burke, J. D., & Johnston, O. G. (2020). The bifactor S-1 model: a psychometrically sounder alternative to test the structure of ADHD and ODD? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48, 911–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802....
13.
Central Statistical Office (2021). Live births by sex, weight of newborn at birth, birth order and age of mother. Re-trieved from: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/....
14.
Chabbert, M., Panagiotou, D., & Wendland, J. (2021a). Predictive factors of women’s subjective perception of childbirth experience: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 39, 43–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
15.
Chabbert, M., Rozenberg, P., & Wendland, J. (2021b). Predictors of negative childbirth experiences among french women. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 50, 450–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn....
16.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.
17.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0231....
18.
Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2015). cocor: a comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correla-tions. PloS One, 10, e0121945. https://doi.org/10.1371/journa....
19.
Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2016). cocron: a web interface and R package for the statistical comparison of Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. International Journal of Internet Science, 11, 51–60.
20.
Domańska, U., Ossowski, R., & Ciżkowicz, B. (2014). Psychological and socio-demographic correlates of women’s decisions to give birth at home. Health Psychology Report, 3, 197–207. https://doi.org/.
22.
Downe, S., Calleja Agius, J., Balaam, M. C., & Frith, L. (2020). Understanding childbirth as a complex salutogenic phenomenon: The EU COST BIRTH Action Special Collection. PloS One, 15, e0236722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journa....
23.
Emmens, B., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2023). Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 41, 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
24.
Euro-Peristat (2022). European perinatal health report: Core indicators of the health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe from 2015 to 2019. Retrieved from https://www.europeristat.com/i....
25.
Fabrigar, L. R., MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-9....
26.
Fenech, G., & Thomson, G. (2014). Tormented by ghosts from their past: a meta-synthesis to explore the psycho-social implications of a traumatic birth on maternal well-being. Midwifery, 30, 185–193.
28.
Garthus-Niegel, S., von Soest, T., Vollrath, M. E., & Eberhard-Gran, M. (2013). The impact of subjective birth ex-periences on post-traumatic stress symptoms: a longitudinal study. Arch Womens Ment Health, 16, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737....
29.
Greene, A. L., Eaton, N. R., Li, K., Forbes, M. K., Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Waldman, I. D., Cicero, D. C., Conway, C. C., Docherty, A. R., Fried, E. I., Ivanova, M. Y., Jonas, K. G., Latzman, R. D., Patrick, C. J., Rein-inghaus, U., Tackett, J. L., Wright, A. G. C., & Kotov, R. (2019). Are fit indices used to test psychopathology structure biased? A simulation study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128, 740–764. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn000....
30.
Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Com-munication Methods and Measures, 14, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/193124....
31.
Hodnett, E. D. (2002). Pain and women’s satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review. Ameri-can Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 186, S160–172. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.20....
32.
Hoffmann, L., Hilger, N., & Banse, R. (2023). The mindset of birth predicts birth outcomes: Evidence form a prospective longitudinal study. European Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 857–871. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2....
33.
Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2014). Development and psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Midwifery, 30, 610–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw....
34.
Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2022). The Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Retrieved from https://www.bss-r.co.uk/.
35.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional cri-teria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/107055....
36.
International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement. (2017). Pregnancy and childbirth standard set and reference guide, version 1.0.3. Retrieved from http://www.ichom.org/medical-c....
37.
Jefford, E., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2018). Development and validation of the Australian version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 36, 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
39.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford.
40.
Knight, M., & Tuffnell, D. (2018). A view from the UK: The UK and Ireland confidential enquiry into maternal deaths and morbidity. Clinical Obsetrics and Gynecology, 61, 347–358. https://doi.org/10.197/GRF.000....
41.
Koelewijn, J. M., Sluijs, A. M., & Vrijkotte, T. G. M. (2017). Possible relationship between general and pregnancy-related anxiety during the first half of pregnancy and the birth process: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open, 7, e013413. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjope....
42.
Larkin, P., Begley, C. M., & Devane, D. (2009). Women’s experiences of labour and birth: an evolutionary concept analysis. Midwifery, 25, e49–e59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw....
43.
Martin, C. R., Hollins Martin, C. J., Burduli, E., Barbosa-Leiker, C., Donovan-Batson, C., & Fleming, S. E. (2018). The Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R): Should the subscale scores or the total score be used? Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 36, 530–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
44.
Martin, C. R., Jefford, E., & Hollins Martin, C. J. (2020). Crisis, what crisis? Replicability of the key measurement characteristics of the Australian version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised. International Journal of Child-birth, 10, 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1891/IJCBIR....
46.
Miller, N., Asali, A. A., Agassi-Zaitler, M., Neumark, E., Eisenberg, M. M., Hadi, E., Elbaz, M., Pasternak, Y., Fish-man, A., & Biron-Shental, T. (2019). Physiological and psychological stress responses to labor and delivery as expressed by salivary cortisol: a prospective study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 221, 351.e1–351.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog....
47.
Minister of Health (2018). Rozporządzenie Ministra Zdrowia z dnia 16 sierpnia 2018 r. w sprawie standardu organi-zacyjnego opieki okołoporodowej [Ordinance of the Minister of Health of 16 August 2018 on the organisational standard of perinatal care]. Retrieved from https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.....
48.
Moreira, H., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2023). Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised in Portuguese postpartum women. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychol-ogy. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
49.
Nájera Catalán, H. E. (2019). Reliability, population classification and weighting in multidimensional poverty measurement: a Monte Carlo study. Social Indicators Research, 142, 887–910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205....
50.
Nakić Radoš, S., Matijaš, M., Brekalo, M., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2023). Further validation of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised: Factor structure, validity, and reliability. Current Psychology, 42, 13693–13702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144....
51.
Nijagal, M. A., Wissig, S., Stowell, C., Olson, E., Amer-Wahlin, I., Bonsel, G., Brooks, A., Coleman, M., Devi Karalasingam, S., Duffy, J. M. N., Flanagan, T., Gebhardt, S., Greene, M. E., Groenendaal, F., R Jeganathan, J. R., Kowaliw, T., Lamain-de-Ruiter, M., Main, E., Owens, M., Petersen, R., … Franx, A. (2018). Standardized out-come measures for pregnancy and childbirth, an ICHOM proposal. BMC Health Services Research, 18, 953. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913....
52.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2023). Caesarean sections. Retrieved from https://data.oecd.org/healthca....
53.
Prosser, S. J., Barnett, A. G., & Miller, Y. D. (2018). Factors promoting or inhibiting normal birth. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18, 241. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884....
54.
Ratislavova, K., Hendrych Lorenzova, E., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2024). Translation and validation of the Czech Republic version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 42, 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
55.
Reise, S. P., Bonifay, W. E., & Haviland, M. G. (2013a). Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the pres-ence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/002238....
56.
Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (2013b). Multidimensionality and structural coeffi-cient bias in structural equation modeling: a bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73, 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316....
57.
Revelle, W., & Condon, D. M. (2019). Reliability from α to ω: a tutorial. Psychological Assessment, 31, 1395–1411. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas000....
58.
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Applying bifactor statistical indices in the evaluation of psy-chological measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/002238....
59.
Romero-Gonzalez, B., Peralta-Ramirez, M. I., Caparros-Gonzalez, R. A., Cambil-Ledesma, A., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2019). Spanish validation and factor structure of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Midwifery, 70, 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw....
60.
Seefeld, L., Weise, V., Kopp, M., Knappe, S., & Garthus-Niegel, S. (2022). Birth experience mediates the association between fear of childbirth and mother-child-bonding up to 14 months postpartum: Findings from the prospec-tive cohort study DREAM. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 776922. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.....
61.
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336....
62.
Skodova, Z., Nepelova, Z., Grendar, M., & Baskova, M. (2019). Psychometric properties of the Slovak version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale (BSS) and Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R). Midwifery, 79, 102550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw....
63.
Skvirsky, V., Taubman-Ben-Ari, O., Hollins Martin, C. J., & Martin, C. R. (2020). Validation of the Hebrew Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised (BSS-R) and its relationship to perceived traumatic labour. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychoogy, 38, 214–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/026468....
64.
Statistics Poland (2021). Demographic yearbook of Poland. Retrieved from: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/....
65.
Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. (1980). Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Annual Spring Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, USA.
66.
Tyupa, S. (2011). A theoretical framework for back-translation as a quality assessment tool. New Voices in Transla-tion Studies, 7, 35–46.
67.
Vogel, J. P., Jung, J., Lavin, T., Simpson, G., Kluwgant, D., Abalos, E., Diaz, V., Downe, S., Filippi, V., Gallos, I., Galadanci, H., Katageri, G., Homer, C. S. E., Hofmeyr, G. J., Liabsuetrakul, T., Morhason-Bello, I. O., Osoti, A., Souza, J. P., Thakar, R., Thangaratinam, S., … Oladapo, O. T. (2024). Neglected medium-term and long-term consequences of labour and childbirth: a systematic analysis of the burden, recommended practices, and a way forward. The Lancet. Global Health, 12, e317–e330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-....
68.
Wegrzynowska, M., Doroszewska, A., Witkiewicz, M., & Baranowska, B. (2020). Polish maternity services in times of crisis: in search of quality care for pregnant women and their babies. Health Care for Women International, 41, 1335–1348. https://doi.org/10.1080/073993....
69.
World Health Organization (2018). Births by caesarean section. Data by country. Retrieved from https://.
71.
Zelkowitz, P., Gold, I., Feeley, N., Hayton, B., Carter, C. S., Tulandi, T., Abenhaim, H. A., & Levin, P. (2014). Psy-chosocial stress moderates the relationships between oxytocin, perinatal depression, and maternal behavior. Hormones and Behavior, 66, 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbe....
72.
Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and McDonald’s ωh: Their rela-tions with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336....
Copyright: © Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk This is an Open Access journal, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
| eISSN: | 2353-5571 |
| ISSN: | 2353-4184 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
