Cargando…

Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation

BACKGROUND: The patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC) is a promising instrument to evaluate the chronic care experiences of patients, yet additional validation is needed to improve its usefulness. METHODS: A total of 1941 patients with diabetes completed the questionnaire. Reliability c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Drewes, Hanneke W, de Jong-van Til, Janneke T, Struijs, Jeroen N, Baan, Caroline A, Tekle, Fetene B, Meijboom, Bert R, Westert, G.P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Igitur publishing 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3601510/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23593054
_version_ 1782263482164445184
author Drewes, Hanneke W
de Jong-van Til, Janneke T
Struijs, Jeroen N
Baan, Caroline A
Tekle, Fetene B
Meijboom, Bert R
Westert, G.P
author_facet Drewes, Hanneke W
de Jong-van Til, Janneke T
Struijs, Jeroen N
Baan, Caroline A
Tekle, Fetene B
Meijboom, Bert R
Westert, G.P
author_sort Drewes, Hanneke W
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC) is a promising instrument to evaluate the chronic care experiences of patients, yet additional validation is needed to improve its usefulness. METHODS: A total of 1941 patients with diabetes completed the questionnaire. Reliability coefficients and factor analyses were used to psychometrically test the PACIC and PACIC+ (i.e. PACIC extended with six additional multidisciplinary team functioning items to improve content validity). Intra-class correlations were computed to identify the extent to which variation in scores can be attributed to GP practices. RESULTS: The PACIC and PACIC+ showed a good psychometric quality (Cronbach’s alpha’s >0.9). Explorative factor analyses showed inconclusive results. Confirmative factor analysis showed that none of the factor structures had an acceptable fit (RMSEA>0.10). In addition, 5.1 to 5.4% of the total variation was identified at the GP practice level. CONCLUSION: The PACIC and PACIC+ are reliable instruments to measure the chronic care management experiences of patients. The PACIC+ is preferred because it also includes multidisciplinary coordination and cooperation—one of the central pillars of chronic care management—with good psychometric quality. Previously identified subscales should be used with caution. Both PACIC instruments are useful in identifying GP practice variation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3601510
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Igitur publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36015102013-04-16 Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation Drewes, Hanneke W de Jong-van Til, Janneke T Struijs, Jeroen N Baan, Caroline A Tekle, Fetene B Meijboom, Bert R Westert, G.P Int J Integr Care Research and Theory BACKGROUND: The patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC) is a promising instrument to evaluate the chronic care experiences of patients, yet additional validation is needed to improve its usefulness. METHODS: A total of 1941 patients with diabetes completed the questionnaire. Reliability coefficients and factor analyses were used to psychometrically test the PACIC and PACIC+ (i.e. PACIC extended with six additional multidisciplinary team functioning items to improve content validity). Intra-class correlations were computed to identify the extent to which variation in scores can be attributed to GP practices. RESULTS: The PACIC and PACIC+ showed a good psychometric quality (Cronbach’s alpha’s >0.9). Explorative factor analyses showed inconclusive results. Confirmative factor analysis showed that none of the factor structures had an acceptable fit (RMSEA>0.10). In addition, 5.1 to 5.4% of the total variation was identified at the GP practice level. CONCLUSION: The PACIC and PACIC+ are reliable instruments to measure the chronic care management experiences of patients. The PACIC+ is preferred because it also includes multidisciplinary coordination and cooperation—one of the central pillars of chronic care management—with good psychometric quality. Previously identified subscales should be used with caution. Both PACIC instruments are useful in identifying GP practice variation. Igitur publishing 2012-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3601510/ /pubmed/23593054 Text en Copyright 2012, International Journal of Integrated Care (IJIC) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This work is licensed under a (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0) Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
spellingShingle Research and Theory
Drewes, Hanneke W
de Jong-van Til, Janneke T
Struijs, Jeroen N
Baan, Caroline A
Tekle, Fetene B
Meijboom, Bert R
Westert, G.P
Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title_full Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title_fullStr Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title_full_unstemmed Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title_short Measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: PACIC and PACIC+ validation
title_sort measuring chronic care management experience of patients with diabetes: pacic and pacic+ validation
topic Research and Theory
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3601510/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23593054
work_keys_str_mv AT dreweshannekew measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT dejongvantiljanneket measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT struijsjeroenn measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT baancarolinea measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT teklefeteneb measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT meijboombertr measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation
AT westertgp measuringchroniccaremanagementexperienceofpatientswithdiabetespacicandpacicvalidation