The "Patient-centered coordination by a care team" questionnaire achieves satisfactory validity and reliability

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Quebecois Patient-Centered Coordination by a Care Team Questionnaire for use in France

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of chronic disease and multimorbidity is increasing and the associated disease and treatment burden is particularly heavy. Coordinated multidisciplinary, patient-centered care is particularly important for people living with chronic disease or multimorbidity. There was no valid tool to measure the quality of coordinated patient-centered care from the patient's perspective until the Patient-Centered Coordination by a Care Team (PCCCT) questionnaire was recently developed in Canada (Quebec/Ontario). The Quebecois version has been validated but is not directly transferable to France due to linguistic, cultural and health system differences between the two countries. To perform a cross-cultural adaptation of the Quebecois PCCCT questionnaire is therefore necessary to obtain a questionnaire's new version adapted for use in France, ensuring item and semantic equivalence.

METHODS

The adaptation process consisted of two stages, both of which were supervised by a scientific committee made up of five healthcare professionals. The first stage was a Delphi consensus involving a multidisciplinary healthcare professional panel to evaluate and harmonize the clarity and appropriateness of the questionnaire for patients in the French health system. During the second stage, adult patients with one or more chronic diseases, from various age, sex, socio-occupational categories, assessed the comprehensibility and conformity of the adapted version of the questionnaire resulting from stage 1 and improved it if necessary. This was achieved using cognitive interviews.

RESULTS

During Stage 1, two rounds were undertaken with 10 professional experts resulting in consensual reformulation of 10 out of the 14 items. These newly formulated items and the 4 remaining items were submitted to patients in Stage 2. Cognitive interviews were undertaken with 14 patients, testing 3 successively adapted versions of the questionnaire, until three consecutive patients did not find any ambiguity or misunderstanding. The final version resulting from the cross-cultural adaptation process aimed at being used in France, has item and semantic equivalence to the original Quebecois version.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement equivalence will be addressed in a future study. This French version is intended to be a useful resource for the health system reforms aimed at promoting more integrated and patient-centered care pathways.

Instruments for evaluating the quality of services in chronic diseases: scoping review

OBJECTIVE

to map the scientific literature on the validity of instruments for evaluating the quality of services provided in primary health care for chronic diseases related to systemic arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, leprosy and tuberculosis.

METHOD

scoping review, following the Joanna Briggs Institute method and described in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. 13 databases and gray literature were included. The selection of studies was carried out after removing duplicates and individual and paired evaluation. The data was extracted based on an elaborate script and presented in tables and charts.

RESULTS

the analysis of 28 selected studies showed that the majority were from Brazil, followed by China and Malaysia. Almost half of the validated instruments were generic, and the specific ones covered the evaluation of diabetes mellitus and leprosy. The types of validation carried out were content and construct.

CONCLUSION

there is a need to construct specific instruments due to the scarcity of studies on the process of validating instruments for evaluating the quality of services provided by primary health care for chronic diseases.

HIGHLIGHTS

(1) Validated instruments for evaluating services in chronic diseases.(2) Possibility of carrying out new studies on adaptations of PCAT and PACIC.(3) No evaluation was identified for minors under 18 years of age with chronic diseases.(4) Use of a generic instrument to evaluate specific chronic diseases.

Content validity of patient-reported measures evaluating experiences of the quality of transitions in healthcare settings-a scoping review

No reviews so far have been conducted to define the constructs of patient-experienced quality in healthcare transitions or to identify existing generic measures of patients' experience of the quality within healthcare transitions. Our aim was to identify domains relevant for people experiencing healthcare transitions when evaluating the quality of care they have received, map the comprehensiveness of existing patient-reported experience measures (PREM), and evaluate the PREMs' content validity. The method was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institutes' guidance for scoping reviews. The search was performed on 07 December 2021 and updated 27 May 2024, in the electronic databases Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Cinahl (EBSCO). The search identified 20,422 publications, and 190 studies were included for review. We identified 30 PREMs assessing at least one aspect of adults' experience of transitions in healthcare. Summarising the content, we consider a model with two domains, organisational and human-relational, likely to be adequate. However, a more comprehensive analysis and adequate definition of the construct is needed. None of the PREMs were considered content valid.

Effectiveness of coordinated care to reduce the risk of prolonged disability among patients suffering from subacute or recurrent acute low back pain in primary care: protocol of the CO.LOMB cluster-randomized, controlled study

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is a common musculoskeletal condition and, globally, a leading cause of years lived with disability. It leads to reduced social participation, impaired quality of life, and direct and indirect costs due to work incapacity. A coordinated approach focusing on psychosocial risk factors, active reeducation, and the early use of tools to maintain employment, may be effective for improving prognosis of patients with LBP. Primary care professionals and multidisciplinary teams, who see patients in the early stages of LBP may be in the best position to implement such a coordinated approach. We designed this study to assess a coordinated multi-faceted strategy in primary care for patients with subacute or recurrent acute LBP.

Methods

The CO.LOMB study was designed as a multicentric, cluster-randomized, controlled study. Patients aged 18-60 years, with subacute or recurrent acute LBP are eligible. Patients also need to be employed (but can be on sick leave) with access to occupational health services. The clusters of GPs will be randomized (1:1) to either the Coordinated-care group or the Usual-care group. Patients will be assigned the group allocated to their GP. The healthcare professionals (GPs and associated physiotherapists) allocated to the Coordinated-care group will perform a 2-session study training. The following interventions are planned in the Coordinated-care group: exploration and management of psychosocial factors, active reeducation with a physiotherapist, the implementing of tools to maintain employment, and a reinforced cooperation between primary healthcare professionals. The primary objective is to assess the benefit of coordinated primary care to reduce disability in LBP patients at 12 months after enrollment: measure using the validated French version of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of pain, work status, and quality of life at various time points. The study plans to enroll 500 patients in 20 GP clusters. Patients will be followed up for 12months.

Discussion

This study will evaluate the benefit of a coordinated multi-faceted strategy in primary care for patients with LBP. Notably whether this approach will alleviate the associated disability, attenuate pain, and promote the maintenance or return to work.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT04826757.

Patient Participation and the Environment: A Scoping Review of Instruments

Patient participation and the environment are critical factors in achieving qualitative healthcare. We conducted a systematic scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework to identify instruments intended to measure patient participation. We assessed those instruments' characteristics, which areas of the healthcare continuum they target, and whether environmental factors are considered. Instruments were considered eligible if they represented the patient perspective and measured patient participation in healthcare. The search was limited to articles written in English and published in the last 10 years. We extracted concepts (i.e., patient empowerment, patient participation, and patient-centeredness) based on the framework developed by Castro et al. and outcomes of significance regarding the review questions and specific objectives. The search was conducted in PsycINFO, CINHAL/EBSCO, and PubMed in September 2019 and July 2020. Of 4802 potential titles, 67 studies reported on a total of 45 instruments that met the inclusion criteria for this review. The concept of patient participation was represented most often in these studies. Although some considered the social environment, no instrument was found to incorporate and address the physical environment. Thirteen instruments were generic and the remaining instruments were intended for specific diagnoses or healthcare contexts. Our work is the first to study instruments from this perspective, and we conclude that there is a lack of instruments that measure aspects of the social and physical environment coherently as part of patient participation.

Development and validation of the patient centeredness index for primary care

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of the Patient Centeredness Index (PCI), evaluate its psychometric characteristics and evaluate the relationships between scores on the PCI and an established measure of empathy.

BACKGROUND

Patient centeredness helps patients manage multiple chronic conditions with their providers, nurses and other team members. However, no instrument exists for evaluating patient centeredness within primary care practices treating this population.

DESIGN

Multi-site instrument development and validation. STROBE reporting guidelines were followed.

METHODS

To identify themes, we consulted literature on patient centeredness and engaged stakeholders who had or were caring for people with multiple chronic conditions (n = 7). We composed and refined items to represent those themes with input from clinicians and researchers. To evaluate reliability and convergent validity, we administered surveys to participants (n = 3622) with chronic conditions recruited from 44 primary care practices for a large-scale cluster randomised clinical trial of the effects of a practice-level intervention on patient and practice-level outcomes. Participants chose to complete the 16-item survey online, on paper or by phone. Surveys assessed demographics, number of chronic conditions and ratings of provider empathy. We conducted exploratory factor analysis to model the interrelationships among items.

RESULTS

A single factor explained 93% of total variance. Factor loadings ranged from 0.55-0.85, and item-test correlations were ≥.67. Cronbach's alpha was .93. A moderate, linear correlation with ratings of provider's empathy (r = .65) supports convergent validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCI is a new tool for obtaining patient perceptions of the patient centeredness of their primary care practice. The PCI shows acceptable reliability and evidence of convergent validity among patients managing chronic conditions.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The PCI rapidly identifies patients' perspectives on patient centeredness of their practice, making it ideal for administration in busy primary care settings that aim to efficiently address patient-identified needs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.org Protocol ID: WLPS-1409-24372.

TITLE

Integrating Behavioural Health and Primary Care for Comorbid Behavioural and Medical Problems (IBHPC).

Advancing cross-national planning and partnership: Proceedings from the International Multimorbidity Symposium 2019

The International Multimorbidity Symposium was held in November 2019 at Western University to achieve three main objectives: to discuss progress and findings from various jurisdictions; to facilitate collaboration through group discussion to identify strategies to move multimorbidity research forward; and to create concrete plans to ensure advances in multimorbidity research and knowledge can be achieved through cross-national partnership. This event included keynote presentations, elevator pitch presentations and breakout sessions and there was a total of 35 attendees from eight countries, representing diverse disciplines and training levels. The overall themes arising from the event were: the importance of integrating the study and management of multimorbidity from both the primary care and public health perspectives; meaningful engagement and collaboration with patients and caregivers to understand key dimensions of multimorbidity; the considerable benefit of collaborative international partnerships; and the need to spread and scale innovations for health care systems that can better respond to the complex needs of patients and caregivers who are living with multimorbidity. Finally, it was well-acknowledged among the attendees that expanding the collaboration and discussion among international colleagues via in-person and virtual events will be important to move multimorbidity research forward.