Stanford University School of Medicine, 1265 Welch Rd, MSOB #X214, Stanford, CA 94305. Email:
Am J Manag Care. 2018 Feb 1;24(2):e37-e44.
Patient-centered care initiatives have proliferated, but assessing their effectiveness requires measures tailored to their likely effects. In this article, we describe the development and pilot testing of patient surveys used to assess change in patients' cancer care experiences over time in response to a patient-centered care initiative.
Prospective case series.
Domains of patient-centered care were informed by the goals of the initiative and a review of existing tools. Items were selected and modified from 6 domains of validated or semivalidated instruments. Items were piloted with patients with cancer in waiting room settings to further assess the relevance and clarity of items, whether important concepts were missing, and acceptability regarding place and timing of the surveys and to estimate baseline top box scores (percentage of patients scoring an item the highest quality level) to minimize likely ceiling effects. The instrument was then administered to a consecutive sample of Stanford Cancer Center patients. Baseline item responses, Cronbach's alpha, and response bias were estimated.
Items were modified based on patient feedback, top box scores, and reassessment of the domains. Over 6 months, 11,273 patients were surveyed, with a 49.7% response rate. Baseline top box scores ranged from 41.7% to 75.0% for any given item. Reliability and internal consistency were high for all domains (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.80) except for the access domain.
We developed reliable instruments to evaluate the essential elements of a patient-centered care initiative at an academic medical center, which minimized patient burden and maximized the response rate.
以患者为中心的护理举措已经大量涌现,但评估其效果需要采用针对其可能效果量身定制的措施。本文介绍了用于评估患者对以患者为中心的护理举措的反应随时间推移而改变的患者调查的开发和初步测试。
前瞻性病例系列研究。
以举措目标和现有工具回顾为依据来确定以患者为中心的护理领域。从 6 个经证实或半证实工具的领域中选择和修改项目。在候诊室环境中对癌症患者进行试点,以进一步评估项目的相关性和清晰度、是否遗漏重要概念,以及接受调查的地点和时间,并估计基线最高分(评分最高的患者比例),以尽量减少可能的天花板效应。然后将该工具应用于斯坦福癌症中心的连续患者样本。估计了基线项目响应、克朗巴赫 α 和响应偏差。
根据患者反馈、最高分和对各领域的重新评估对项目进行了修改。在 6 个月期间,对 11273 名患者进行了调查,响应率为 49.7%。任何给定项目的基线最高分范围为 41.7%至 75.0%。除了获取途径领域外,所有领域的可靠性和内部一致性都很高(克朗巴赫 α≥0.80)。
我们开发了可靠的工具来评估学术医疗中心以患者为中心的护理举措的基本要素,这些工具最大限度地减少了患者负担,提高了响应率。