Psychometric Testing of a Patient Empowerment, Engagement, and Activation Survey

Impact of digital interventions and online health communities in patient activation: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Study the efficacy of digital health interventions in enhancing patient activation and identify the distinct features of these interventions using the WHO classification system.

METHODS

Asystematic reviewand meta-analysis were carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and ProQuest. Randomized controlled trials (RCT), quasi-randomized controlled trials, and before-and-after studies enrolling patients ≥ 18 years of age with the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) score measurement and contain digital intervention with any aspects of health education or health-related behavior were included. The Downs and Black quality assessment tool was used to assess the quality of the articles.

RESULTS

In the three different types of meta-analyses, implementing the intervention led to a PAM score increase (Mean Difference (M.D.)), ranging from a minimum of (MD = 0.2014, 95 % CI = 0.0871-0.3158) and a highly significant p-value 0.0006 to a maximum of (MD = 2.7882, 95 % CI = 1.5558-4.0206) and a p-value < .0001. While the M.D. score of 0.2014 may seem relatively low, it is enough to elevate the patient from one activation level to a higher one out of the four activation levels.

CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The results suggest the effectiveness of digital health interventions on patient activation across diverse settings and contexts, implying potential generalizability. Using WHO classification, all examined digital interventions addressed the challenges of information, utilization, and efficiency in the health system, but not equity-related challenges. The study recognized online health communities (OHCs) as a subset of digital interventions that enhance patient activation through social support.

Improving primary care access for rural women Veterans: the Boost Team

Objectives

To improve healthcare access for rural cisgender women and gender diverse Veterans, we created the "Boost Team," a clinician-driven telehealth outreach service to connect this population to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) services.

Methods

Between 9/2021 and 2/2022, we conducted a needs assessment in the Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 21 and used those data to develop an outreach intervention. We piloted a clinician-led outreach intervention in 3/2022, and formally deployed an outreach team in 9/2022.

Results

The needs assessment uncovered opportunities to educate Veterans, staff, and clinicians about available VHA women's health services, and a need for easily-accessible gender-sensitive services. During the pilot, 58% (7/12) rural cisgender women Veterans were successfully contacted, all reported positive experiences with the intervention. The formal outreach team launched in 9/2022 and consists of a nurse practitioner (NP), scheduler, Peer Support Specialist, and medical director. From 9/2022 to 12/2022 the Boost NP called 110 rural cisgender women and gender diverse Veterans and spoke to 65 (59%) of them. Common care needs identified and addressed included care coordination, new referrals, medication management, and diagnostics.

Discussion

Data from Boost show that clinician-led outreach can engage rural cisgender women and gender diverse Veterans in VHA services, there is a desire for more gender-sensitive services, and there is a need for systems-level improvements to allow for improved care coordination and decreased leakage outside of VHA. Using robust strategies grounded in implementation sciences, we will continue conducting a program evaluation to study the impact of Boost and scale and expand the program.

Association between health-related empowerment and health-protective behaviors among community-dwelling older adults

BACKGROUND

Empowerment is a broad concept seen as a critical approach for helping older adults who lack power to gain control over various aspects of their lives, including their health-protective behaviors.

AIM

The study investigated the association between health-related empowerment and health-protective behaviors in older adults.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional correlational research design was used by recruiting a convenient sample of 200 older adults.

TOOLS

The Elder Health Empowerment Scale and Health Protective Behavior Scale were used to collect the participant data.

RESULTS

It showed a significant positive correlation between health-related empowerment and health-protective behaviors in older adults (r = 0.891, p = 0.001), indicating that as health-related empowerment increases, engagement in health-protective behaviors also increases. Furthermore, health-related empowerment accounted for a large proportion of the variation in health-protective behaviors (85.7 %).

CONCLUSION

Overall, these findings suggest that there is a need for interventions to improve the health-related empowerment of older adults, particularly in terms of their ability to turn their health goals into actionable plans, overcome barriers to health, and make informed healthcare choices. However, the studied older adults generally engage in health protective behaviors; there is variability in the extent to which they engage in specific behaviors, which may provide valuable insights for developing targeted health promotion programs and interventions.

Relationship between Empowerment and Functioning and Disability in Older Japanese Patients: A Covariance Structure Analysis

In the present study, 151 Japanese older adults aged over 65 years and admitted to recovery-phase rehabilitation facilities were enrolled to investigate the relationship between empowerment and contextual factors, functioning and disability, with structural equation modeling (SEM). The analysis included 151 patients aged 81.75 ± 7.15 years, including 54 males (35.76%) and 97 females (64.24%). The results of the SEM analysis showed that role presence (β = 0.45, p < 0.01) and family structure (β = 0.18, p = 0.02) significantly impacted empowerment. In addition, the results showed that patient empowerment positively impacted physical activity (β = 0.25, p < 0.01) and psychosomatic functions and abilities (β = 0.36, p < 0.01). Furthermore, the goodness-of-fit of the model hypothesized in this study was shown to have explanatory power. This study showed that empowerment contributed to the prevention of physical inactivity and confinement among Japanese older patients. In other words, the study provided evidence for the importance of empowerment-based program planning in the practice of person-centered care aimed at promoting the health and discharge of older patients in Japan.

Reliability and Validation of the Japanese Version of the Patient Empowerment Scale

Empowerment scales for inpatients have been developed worldwide, but their validity and reliability have not been adequately tested and applied to the health promotion and care among older adults during hospitalization. In this study, the Patient Empowerment Scale developed by Faulkner was translated into Japanese, and Japanese patients were surveyed to test its clinical applicability. To test its applicability, 151 patients in rehabilitation wards were surveyed in four municipalities. After considering ceiling/floor effects and validating the structure, the Patient Empowerment Scale—Japanese comprised 37 items and six factors: subject−staff interaction, environmental adjustment through collaboration, necessary information gathering and problem awareness, proactive behavioral practices, self-disclosure, and self-management of activities. Criteria-related validity assessment confirmed the scale’s correlation with the Health Locus of Control Scale, General Self-Efficacy Scale, 13-item Sense of Coherence Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale. Regarding internal consistency, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.93 for all 37 items. The Cronbach’s alphas for the six factors were 0.93, 0.91, 0.92, 0.92, 0.91, and 0.75, respectively. In our test/re-test of reliability, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between the first and second total scores was ρ = 0.96, p < 0.01. These results confirm the scale’s validity and reliability, and its applicability to older hospitalized patients.

Patient engagement in care: A scoping review of recently validated tools assessing patients' and healthcare professionals' preferences and experience

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in care is a priority and a key component of clinical practice. Different approaches to care have been introduced to foster patient engagement. There is a lack of a recent review on tools for assessing the main concepts and dimensions related to patient engagement in care.

OBJECTIVE

Our scoping review sought to map and summarize recently validated tools for assessing various concepts and dimensions of patient engagement in care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A scoping review of recent peer-reviewed articles describing tools that assess preferences in and experience with patient engagement in care was conducted in four databases (Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL-EBSCO). We adopted a broad definition based on the main concepts of patient engagement in care: patient-centredness, empowerment, shared decision-making and partnership in care.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 2161 articles found, 16, each describing a different tool, were included and analysed. Shared decision-making and patient-centredness are the two main concepts evaluated, often simultaneously in most of the tools. Only four scales measure patient-centredness, empowerment and shared decision-making at the same time, but no tool measures the core dimensions of partnership in care. Most of the tools did not include patients in their development or validation or just consulted them during the validation phase.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

There is no tool coconstructed with patients from development to validation, which can be used to assess the main concepts and dimensions of patient engagement in care at the same time.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This manuscript was prepared with a patient expert who is one of the authors. Vincent Dumez, who is a patient expert and codirector of the Center of Excellence on Partnership with Patients and the Public, has contributed to the preparation of the manuscript.

Assessing and promoting partnership between patients and health-care professionals: Co-construction of the CADICEE tool for patients and their relatives

CONTEXT

Partnership between patients and health-care professionals (HCPs) is a concept that needs a valid, practical measure to facilitate its use by patients and HCPs.

OBJECTIVE

To co-construct a tool for measuring the degree of partnership between patients and HCPs.

DESIGN

The CADICEE tool was developed in four steps: (1) generate key dimensions of patient partnership in clinical care; (2) co-construct the tool; (3) assess face and content validity from patients' and HCPs' viewpoints; and (4) assess the usability of the tool and explore its measurement performance.

RESULTS

The CADICEE tool comprises 24 items under 7 dimensions: 1) relationship of Confidence or trust between the patient and the HCPs; 2) patient Autonomy; 3) patient participation in Decisions related to care; 4) shared Information on patient health status or care; 5) patient personal Context; 6) Empathy; and 7) recognition of Expertise. Assessment of the tool's usability and measurement performance showed, in a convenience sample of 246 patients and relatives, high face validity, acceptability and relevance for both patients and HCPs, as well as good construct validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The CADICEE tool is developed in co-construction with patients to evaluate the degree of partnership in care desired by patients in their relationship with HCPs. The tool can be used in various clinical contexts and in different health-care settings.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients were involved in determining the importance of constructing this questionnaire. They co-constructed it, pre-tested it and were part of the entire questionnaire development process. Three patients participated in the writing of the article.