Quality of integrated chronic care measured by patient survey: identification, selection and application of most appropriate instruments

Share/Save/Bookmark

Vrijhoef, Hubertus J.M. and Berbee, Rieneke and Wagner, Edward H. and Steuten, Lotte M.G. (2009) Quality of integrated chronic care measured by patient survey: identification, selection and application of most appropriate instruments. Health Expectations, 12 (4). pp. 417-429. ISSN 1369-6513

[img]
Preview
PDF
131kB
Abstract:Objective  To identify the most appropriate generic instrument to measure experience and/or satisfaction of people receiving integrated chronic care.

Background  Health care is becoming more user-centred and, as a result, the experience of users of care and evaluation of their experience and/or satisfaction is taken more seriously. It is unclear to what extent existing instruments are appropriate in measuring the experience and/or satisfaction of people using integrated chronic care.

Methods  Instruments were identified by means of a systematic literature review. Appropriateness of instruments was analysed on seven criteria. The two most promising instruments were translated into Dutch, if necessary, and administered to a convenience sample of 109 people with a chronic illness. Data derived from respondents were analysed statistically. Focus-group interviews were conducted to assess the semantic and technical equivalence as well as opinions of people about the applicability and relevance of the translated instruments.

Results  From 37 instruments identified, the Patients’ Assessment of Care for chronIc Conditions (PACIC) and the short form of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire III (PSQ-18) were selected as most promising instruments. Both instruments produced similar median scores across people with different chronic conditions. The overall PACIC and its subscales and the overall PSQ-18 were highly internally consistent, but not the PSQ-18 subscales. Overall, the PACIC demonstrated better psychometric characteristics. PACIC and PSQ-18 scores were found to be moderately correlated. Whereas more respondents preferred the PSQ-18, focus-group participants regarded the PACIC to be more applicable and relevant. The technical and semantic equivalence of both instruments were sufficient.

Conclusions  Because of its psychometric characteristics, perceived applicability and relevance, the PACIC is the most appropriate instrument to measure the experience of people receiving integrated chronic care
Item Type:Article
Copyright:© The Authors
Faculty:
Management and Governance (SMG)
Research Group:
Link to this item:http://purl.utwente.nl/publications/78170
Official URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00557.x
Export this item as:BibTeX
EndNote
HTML Citation
Reference Manager

 

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Metis ID: 260985