Suppr超能文献

测量糖尿病患者的慢性病管理体验:PACIC 和 PACIC+ 的验证。

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

机构信息

Scientific Centre for Care and Welfare (Tranzo), Tilburg University, The Netherlands; and National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Centre for Prevention and Health Services Research, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Integr Care. 2012 Oct 1;12:e194. doi: 10.5334/ijic.862. Print 2012 Oct.

Abstract

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.

摘要

背景

患者评估慢性病护理(PACIC)是一种很有前途的工具,可以评估患者的慢性病护理体验,但需要进一步验证以提高其有用性。

方法

共有 1941 名糖尿病患者完成了问卷。信度系数和因子分析用于心理测试 PACIC 和 PACIC+(即 PACIC 扩展了六个额外的多学科团队功能项目,以提高内容效度)。计算组内相关系数以确定分数的变化在多大程度上归因于全科医生实践。

结果

PACIC 和 PACIC+ 表现出良好的心理测量质量(Cronbach's alpha's >0.9)。探索性因子分析结果不一致。验证性因子分析表明,没有一种因子结构具有可接受的拟合度(RMSEA>0.10)。此外,在全科医生实践层面上确定了 5.1%至 5.4%的总变异。

结论

PACIC 和 PACIC+ 是测量患者慢性病护理管理体验的可靠工具。由于 PACIC+还包括多学科协调与合作——慢性病护理管理的核心支柱之一——具有良好的心理测量质量,因此更受欢迎。先前确定的分量表应谨慎使用。这两种 PACIC 工具都有助于识别全科医生实践的差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5806/3601510/f30e0f47d14f/ijic2012-2012194-001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验