The importance of patient involvement in medical decision making is indispu
table. Yet, decision making concerning medical treatment options is a diffi
cult task for most patients. In order to study decision-making processes in
health care, O'Connor developed the decisional conflict scale (DCS). The D
CS assesses the level of 'decisional conflict' that patients experience whi
le making health care decisions, and encompasses the following three subsca
les: (1) uncertainty about choosing among alternatives; (2) factors contrib
uting to uncertainty; (3) perceived effectiveness of the decision. The aim
of the present study is to investigate the reliability and validity of the
Dutch version of the DCS. A written version of the DCS was administered in
two samples of Dutch cancer patients. One sample consisted of cancer patien
ts faced with the decision whether or not to undergo palliative chemotherap
y (N = 29). The other sample included women with early stage breast cancer
who had to choose between mastectomy or lumpectomy followed by radiation th
erapy (N = 141). The response rates were 76% and 91%, respectively. The rel
iability coefficients of the three subscales were 0.52, 0.80, 0.84, and 0.7
4, 0.83, 0.83 in the two samples, respectively. Construct validity was part
ly supported. Criterion validity was substantiated. In evaluating the facto
rial validity, it was found that the original three-factor model had to be
rejected (chi (2)(87) = 293, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA
) = 0.137). A subsequent exploratory factor analysis suggested an alternati
ve four-factor model. The psychometric properties of the DCS were partly co
nfirmed in Dutch cancer patients. Improved 'wording' of certain items, e.g.
to avoid double negatives, could further increase the factorial validity o
f the DCS. Then, this scale may be a valuable tool for studies that address
the quality of medical decision making. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland
Ltd. All rights reserved.