Background Family accommodation (FA) is a common phenomenon in obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) and is associated with greater symptom severity, functional impairment, and poorer treatment outcomes. Assessing FA is therefore clinically relevant, yet no validated French-language instrument is currently available to assess accommodation from the patient’s perspective. Objective The present study aimed to translate and validate a French version of the Family Accommodation Scale–Patient Version (FAS-PV) and to examine its psychometric properties in adults with OCD. Methods Eighty-five adults diagnosed with OCD and 68 of their relatives were recruited in a specialized outpatient clinic. Patients completed the French FAS-PV alongside measures of OCD severity (Y-BOCS), relative-reported accommodation (FAS-SR), psychological distress, functional impairment, and family functioning. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted, and internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and convergent and divergent validity were examined. Results The French FAS-PV demonstrated excellent internal consistency (McDonald’s ω = 0.89) and strong test–retest reliability ( r = 0.89). Exploratory analyses supported a four-factor solution explaining 51.8 % of the variance, although item distribution partially diverged from the original theoretical structure. Confirmatory analyses provided partial support for the four-factor model, with adequate absolute fit but incremental indices slightly below conventional thresholds. Convergent validity was supported by significant associations with OCD severity, family accommodation, distress, and functional impairment, while divergent validity was confirmed by the absence of associations with impulsivity and age. Conclusions The French FAS-PV demonstrates appreciable psychometric properties as an instrument for assessing family accommodation in adults with OCD and provides a useful tool for clinical practice and research in French-speaking contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Connor et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: