Dataset Information

The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Valid and comprehensive instruments to measure integrated care are required to capture patient experience and improve quality of patient care. This study aimed to validate the Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale (PEICS), among patients with chronic conditions seen in primary care.

Methods

One hundred and fifty-nine (159) French-speaking adults with at least one chronic condition were recruited in two family medicine clinics in Quebec (Canada) and completed the 17-item PEICS (T1). Fifty (50) participants completed it a second time 2 weeks later (T2). The internal consistency of the scale was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, the test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and concurrent validity using three dimensions of the Continuity of Care from Multiple Clinicians (CC-MC), with Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.

Results

Cronbach's alpha for the questionnaire was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.91). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.90) and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient with the three dimensions of the CC-MC varied from 0.44 to 0.54.

Conclusions and discussion

The PEICS showed good psychometric properties. This scale could be used in a population with chronic conditions followed in primary care to measure patient experience of integrated care.

SUBMITTER: Joober H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6199562 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care.

Joober Heithem H Chouinard Maud-Christine MC King Jenny J Lambert Mireille M Hudon Émilie É Hudon Catherine C

International journal of integrated care 20181012 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Valid and comprehensive instruments to measure integrated care are required to capture patient experience and improve quality of patient care. This study aimed to validate the Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale (PEICS), among patients with chronic conditions seen in primary care.<h4>Methods</h4>One hundred and fifty-nine (159) French-speaking adults with at least one chronic condition were recruited in two family medicine clinics in Quebec (Canada) and completed the ...[more]

PMID: 30483034

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Measuring self-management helps identify the degree of participation of people in the management of their chronic conditions and guides clinicians in determining person-centred priorities for providing support. The Partners in Health scale, a self-report generic questionnaire, was developed to capture the self-management of patients with chronic conditions. This study aimed to translate the Partners in Health scale into French and to examine its psychometric properties in French-speaking people with chronic conditions followed in primary care. METHODS:The Partners in Health scale was translated into French using Hawkins and Osborne's method (2012). Content validity was evaluated through cognitive interviews (Think Aloud Method). Internal consistency was measured at baseline with Cronbach's alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated at baseline and two weeks later using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Concurrent validity was measured at baseline with the Self-efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEM-CD) and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), using Spearman correlations. RESULTS:Cognitive interviews were conducted with 10 participants. During these interviews, most items were clearly understood and accepted as formulated; only a few terms were modified. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the French-language version of the Partners in Health scale, 168 participants (male = 34.5%; mean age = 58 years; mean number of chronic conditions = 4.1) completed the questionnaire at baseline and 47 of them completed the questionnaire two weeks later by telephone. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.81-0.88). The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.58-0.87). Concurrent validity with spearman's coefficient correlation of Self-efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease and Patient Activation Measure was 0.68 and 0.61 respectively. CONCLUSION:The French-language version of the Partners in Health scale is a reliable and valid questionnaire for the measure of self-management in persons with chronic conditions seen in primary care.

Project description:ObjectiveTo understand disparities in primary care patient experience.DesignA serial cross-sectional study was conducted to understand disparities in patient experience at 2 time points (2014 and 2016). Disparities related to age, gender, neighbourhood income, and self-rated health were explored using 3 analytic approaches: stratification, logistic regression, and relative comparison across multiple demographic variables.SettingA multisite family health team in Toronto, Ont.ParticipantsPatients in the family medicine practice who completed e-mail surveys in 2014 (n = 1171, 19% response rate) and 2016 (n = 1823, 15% response rate).Main outcome measuresPatient-reported access (timely access when sick, access after hours) and patient-centredness (opportunity to ask questions, involvement in care decisions, enough time with provider).ResultsPerformance for all measures improved between 2014 and 2016, with the greatest absolute improvement seen in access after hours (61% in 2014; 75% in 2016). Patients residing in low-income neighbourhoods reported worse patient experiences than those in high-income neighbourhoods did, as did patients with poor versus excellent self-rated health, even after adjustment for other variables. For example, in 2016, 60% of patients residing in low-income neighbourhoods reported timely access when sick versus 70% in high-income neighbourhoods (adjusted odds ratio of 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95); 60% of patients with poor or fair self-rated health reported timely access when sick versus 72% with excellent self-rated health (adjusted odds ratio of 0.54, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84). Comparing across demographic groups, patients with excellent self-rated health and poor or fair self-rated health reported the best and worst experiences, respectively, for all measures. In 2016, the average disparity between subgroups was largest for access after hours.ConclusionIn this setting, patient experience was worse for patients in lower-income neighbourhoods and those with poor or fair self-rated health. Access after hours demonstrated the greatest overall absolute improvement but also the greatest widening of disparities.

Project description:BackgroundImproving the patient experience is one of the quadruple aims of healthcare. Therefore, understanding patient experiences and perceptions of healthcare interactions is paramount to quality improvement. This integrative review aimed to explore how patients with chronic conditions experience Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in primary care.MethodsAn integrative review was conducted to comprehensively synthesize primary studies that used qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Databases searched were Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science on June 1st, 2021. Eligible studies were empirical full-text studies in primary care that reported experiences or perceptions of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice by adult patients with a chronic condition, in any language published in any year. Quality appraisal was conducted on included studies using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Data on patients' experiences and perceptions of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in primary care were extracted, and findings were thematically analyzed through a meta-synthesis.ResultsForty-eight (n = 48) studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of n = 3803 participants. Study quality of individual studies was limited by study design, incomplete reporting, and the potential for positive publication bias. Three themes and their sub-themes were developed inductively: (1) Interacting with Healthcare Teams, subthemes: widening the network, connecting with professionals, looking beyond the condition, and overcoming chronic condition collectively; (2) Valuing Convenient Healthcare, subthemes: sharing space and time, care planning creates structure, coordinating care, valuing the general practitioner role, and affording healthcare; (3) Engaging Self-care, subthemes: engaging passively is circumstantial, and, engaging actively and leading care.ConclusionsPatients overwhelmingly had positive experiences of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice, signaling it is appropriate for chronic condition management in primary care. The patient role in managing their chronic condition was closely linked to their experience. Future studies should investigate how the patient role impacts the experience of patients, carers, and health professionals in this context.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO: CRD42020156536.

Dataset Information

The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions and discussion

Publications

The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure