Detecting and measuring deprivation in primary care: development, validity and reliability of a self-reported questionnaire - the DiPCare-Q

Background: General practitioners play a central role in taking deprivation into consideration when caring for patients in primary care. Validated questions to identify deprivation in primary-care practices are still lacking. For both clinical and research purposes, this study therefore aims to develop and validate a standardized instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level. Methods: The Deprivation in Primary Care Questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) was developed using qualitative and quantitative approaches between 2008 and 2011. A systematic review identified 199 questions related to deprivation. Using judgmental item quality, these were reduced to 38 questions. Two focus groups (primary-care physicians, and primary-care researchers), structured interviews (10 laymen), and think aloud interviews (eight cleaning staff) assured face validity. Item response theory analysis was then used to derive the DiPCare-Q index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients who were to complete the questionnaire a second time over the phone. For construct and criterion validity, the final 16 questions were administered to a random sample of 1,898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary-care practices in western Switzerland (validation set) along with questions on subjective social status (subjective SES ladder), education, source of income, welfare status, and subjective poverty. Results: Deprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions (table); material deprivation (eight items), social deprivation (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (KR20 = 0.827) and the validation set (KR20 = 0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (ICC = 0.847). For construct validity, we showed the DiPCare-Q index to be correlated to patients' estimation of their position on the subjective SES ladder (rs = 0.539). This position was correlated to both material and social deprivation independently suggesting two separate mechanisms enhancing the feeling of deprivation. Conclusion: The DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care. Questions from the DiPCare-Q are easy to use when investigating patients' social history and could improve clinicians' ability to detect underlying social distress related to deprivation.