Edinburgh Napier University

  Aim: This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised and evaluate its reliability and validity.

Methods: After translating the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised into Japanese, we conducted an Internet-based cross-sectional study with 445 Japanesespeaking women within 2 months of childbirth. Of these, 98 participated in the retest 1 month later. Data were analyzed using the COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments. Content validity was evaluated through cognitive debriefing during the translation process into Japanese. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify structural and cross-cultural validities. For hypothesis testing, we tested correlations with existing measures for convergent and divergent validities, and for known-group discriminant validity, we made comparisons between types of childbirth. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach's α, and test–retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results: For the Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised, the established threefactor model fit poorly, whereas the four-factor model fit better. Full metric invariance was observed in both the nulliparous and multiparous groups. Good convergent, divergent, and known-group discriminant validities and test–retest reliability were established. Internal consistency observations were suboptimal; however for vaginal childbirth, the Cronbach's α of the total score was .71.

Conclusions: The Japanese-Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised is a valid and reliable scale, with the exception of internal consistency that requires further investigation. If limited to vaginal childbirth, research, clinical applications, and international comparisons can be drawn.