• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美国一项用于评估患者参与行为和能力的新自我报告测量工具的开发及心理测量学评价:患者参与能力调查

Development and psychometric evaluation of a new self-report measure to assess patient engagement behaviours and capacity in the USA: the Patient Engagement Capacity Survey.

作者信息

Gregory Megan E, Sieck Cynthia J, Walker Daniel M, Di Tosto Gennaro, Edwards Michael C, McAlearney Ann Scheck, Gebretsadik Sarah, DeVos Tess V, Hefner Jennifer L

机构信息

Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

Center for Health Equity, Dayton Children's Hospital, Dayton, Ohio, USA.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2025 Sep 15;15(9):e091620. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091620.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091620
PMID:40954080
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12439151/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Patient engagement (PE), or a patient's participation in their healthcare, is an important component of comprehensive healthcare delivery, yet there is not an existing, publicly available, measurement tool to assess PE capacity and behaviours. We sought to develop a survey to measure PE capacity and behaviours for use in ambulatory healthcare clinics.

DESIGN

Measure development and psychometric evaluation.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1180 adults in the USA from 2022 to 2024, including 1050 individuals who had indicated they had seen a healthcare provider in the prior 12 months who were recruited nationally via social media across three separate samples; 8 patient advisors and healthcare providers recruited from a large, midwestern US Academic Medical Center; and 122 patients recruited from five participating ambulatory clinics in the Midwestern USA.

METHODS

An initial survey was developed based on a concept mapping approach with a Project Advisory Board composed of patients, researchers and clinicians. Social media was then used to recruit 540 participants nationally (Sample 1) to complete the initial, 101-item version of the survey to generate data for factor analysis. We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to assess model and item fit to inform item reduction, and subsequently conducted cognitive interviews with eight additional participants (patient advisors and providers; Sample 2), who read survey items aloud, shared their thoughts and selected a response. The survey was revised and shortened based on these results. Next, a test-retest survey, also administered nationally via another round of social media recruitment, was administered two times to a separate sample (n=155; Sample 3), 2 weeks apart. We further revised the survey to remove items with low temporal stability based on these results. For clinic administration, research staff approached patients (n=122; Sample 4) in waiting rooms in one of five ambulatory clinics to complete the survey electronically or on paper to determine feasibility of in-clinic survey completion. We engaged in further item reduction based on provider feedback about survey length and fielded a final revised and shortened survey nationally via a final round of social media recruitment (n=355; Sample 5) to obtain psychometric data on this final version.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Cronbach's alphas, intraclass correlations (ICCs), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), standardised root mean squared residual (SRMR).

RESULTS

The final PE Capacity Survey (PECS) includes six domains across two scales: 'engagement behaviours' (ie, preparing for appointments, ensuring understanding, adhering to care) and 'engagement capacity' (ie, healthcare navigation resources, resilience, relationship with provider). The PECS is 18 questions, can be completed during a clinic visit in less than 10 minutes, and produces scores which demonstrate acceptable internal consistency reliability (α=0.72 engagement behaviours, 0.76 engagement capacity), indicating items are measuring the same overarching construct. The scales also had high test-retest reliability (ICC=0.82 behaviours, 0.86 capacity), indicating stability of response over time, and expected dimensionality with high fit indices for the final scales (behaviours: CFI=0.97; RMSEA=0.07; SRMR=0.05; capacity: CFI=0.99; RMSEA=0.06; SRMR=0.06), indicating initial evidence of construct validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The PECS is the first known measure to assess patients' capacity for engagement and represents a step toward informing interventions and care plans that acknowledge a patient's engagement capacity and supporting engagement behaviours. Future work should be done to validate the measure in other languages and patient populations, and to assess criterion-related validity of the measure against patient outcomes.

摘要

目的

患者参与(PE),即患者对自身医疗保健的参与,是全面医疗服务的一个重要组成部分,但目前尚无现有的公开可用测量工具来评估PE能力和行为。我们试图开发一项调查,以测量门诊医疗诊所中患者的PE能力和行为。

设计

测量工具开发及心理测量学评估。

设置与参与者

2022年至2024年期间,美国共有1180名成年人,其中包括1050名表示在过去12个月内看过医疗服务提供者的个体,他们通过社交媒体在全国范围内分三个独立样本招募;8名患者顾问和医疗服务提供者,从美国中西部一家大型学术医疗中心招募;以及122名患者,从美国中西部五家参与的门诊诊所招募。

方法

基于概念映射方法,与由患者、研究人员和临床医生组成的项目咨询委员会共同开发了初始调查问卷。然后利用社交媒体在全国范围内招募540名参与者(样本1),以完成初始的101项版本调查问卷,从而生成用于因子分析的数据。我们进行了探索性和验证性因子分析,以评估模型和项目拟合情况,为项目缩减提供依据,随后对另外8名参与者(患者顾问和提供者;样本2)进行了认知访谈,他们大声朗读调查问卷项目,分享想法并选择答案。根据这些结果对调查问卷进行了修订和缩短。接下来,通过另一轮社交媒体招募在全国范围内对一个单独样本(n = 155;样本3)进行了两次重测调查,间隔2周。基于这些结果,我们进一步修订了调查问卷,以删除时间稳定性较低的项目。对于诊所管理,研究人员在中西部美国五家门诊诊所之一的候诊室接近患者(n = 122;样本4),以电子方式或纸质方式完成调查问卷,以确定在诊所内完成调查问卷的可行性。我们根据提供者对调查问卷长度的反馈进一步进行项目缩减,并通过最后一轮社交媒体招募在全国范围内进行了最终修订和缩短的调查问卷(n = 355;样本5),以获取该最终版本的心理测量学数据。

主要和次要结局指标

克朗巴哈系数、组内相关系数(ICC)、比较拟合指数(CFI)、近似均方根误差(RMSEA)、标准化均方根残差(SRMR)。

结果

最终的患者参与能力调查问卷(PECS)包括两个量表中的六个领域:“参与行为”(即预约准备、确保理解、坚持治疗)和“参与能力”(即医疗导航资源、恢复力、与提供者的关系)。PECS有18个问题,可在不到10分钟的门诊就诊期间完成,并产生的分数显示出可接受的内部一致性信度(参与行为α = 0.72,参与能力α = 0.76),表明各项目测量的是同一个总体结构。这些量表还具有较高的重测信度(ICC = 0.82行为,0.86能力),表明随时间推移反应具有稳定性,并且最终量表具有预期的维度,拟合指数较高(行为:CFI = 0.97;RMSEA = 0.07;SRMR = 0.05;能力:CFI = 0.99;RMSEA = 0.06;SRMR = 0.06),表明具有结构效度的初步证据。

结论

PECS是首个已知的评估患者参与能力的测量工具,代表了朝着为承认患者参与能力并支持参与行为的干预措施和护理计划提供信息迈出的一步。未来应开展工作,以验证该测量工具在其他语言和患者群体中的有效性,并评估该测量工具与患者结局的标准关联效度。

相似文献

1
Development and psychometric evaluation of a new self-report measure to assess patient engagement behaviours and capacity in the USA: the Patient Engagement Capacity Survey.美国一项用于评估患者参与行为和能力的新自我报告测量工具的开发及心理测量学评价:患者参与能力调查
BMJ Open. 2025 Sep 15;15(9):e091620. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091620.
2
A New Measure of Quantified Social Health Is Associated With Levels of Discomfort, Capability, and Mental and General Health Among Patients Seeking Musculoskeletal Specialty Care.一种新的量化社会健康指标与寻求肌肉骨骼专科护理的患者的不适程度、能力以及心理和总体健康水平相关。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Apr 1;483(4):647-663. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003394. Epub 2025 Feb 5.
3
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
4
Is It Possible to Develop a Patient-reported Experience Measure With Lower Ceiling Effect?是否有可能开发一种天花板效应较低的患者报告体验测量方法?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Apr 1;483(4):693-703. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003262. Epub 2024 Oct 25.
5
Empowerment in primary care and psychiatric settings: a psychometric evaluation of the Swedish version of the empowerment scale.初级保健和精神科环境中的赋权:赋权量表瑞典语版本的心理测量评估
BMC Psychol. 2025 Aug 13;13(1):909. doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-03123-y.
6
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
7
Post-pandemic planning for maternity care for local, regional, and national maternity systems across the four nations: a mixed-methods study.针对四个地区的地方、区域和国家孕产妇保健系统的疫情后规划:一项混合方法研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Sep;13(35):1-25. doi: 10.3310/HHTE6611.
8
Development and validation of patient-reported outcome measures for platysma prominence.颈阔肌突出患者报告结局指标的开发与验证
Curr Med Res Opin. 2025 Jul 31:1-14. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2025.2537898.
9
Measurement properties of the Comprehensive Quality-of-Life Measure for Acne (CompAQ): a cohort study at three international sites.痤疮综合生活质量量表(CompAQ)的测量属性:一项在三个国际地点开展的队列研究
Br J Dermatol. 2025 Jul 17;193(2):267-275. doi: 10.1093/bjd/ljaf127.
10
Assessment of the Psychometric Properties of the Mask Usability Scale: A Measure of the Perceived Usability of N95 Respirators Among Healthcare Students and Staff.口罩可用性量表的心理测量特性评估:一项针对医护专业学生和工作人员对N95口罩感知可用性的测量。
J Adv Nurs. 2025 Aug;81(8):4613-4626. doi: 10.1111/jan.16590. Epub 2024 Nov 13.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of a conceptual model of the capacity for patients to engage in their health care: a group concept mapping study.患者参与自身医疗保健能力概念模型的构建:群组概念映射研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Aug 10;23(1):846. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09785-x.
2
Clinical Validity of the PROMIS Healthcare Engagement 8-Item Short Form.PROMIS 医疗保健参与 8 项简短表单的临床有效性。
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Jul;38(9):2021-2029. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07992-6. Epub 2023 Apr 28.
3
Adoption of Patient Engagement Strategies by Physician Practices in the United States.
美国医师执业机构采用患者参与策略。
Med Care. 2022 Sep 1;60(9):691-699. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001748. Epub 2022 Jul 14.
4
A Guide to Selecting Participatory Research Methods Based on Project and Partnership Goals.基于项目和伙伴关系目标选择参与式研究方法指南。
J Particip Res Methods. 2022;3(1). doi: 10.35844/001c.32605. Epub 2022 May 23.
5
The role of health care organizations in patient engagement: Mechanisms to support a strong relationship between patients and clinicians.医疗机构在患者参与中的作用:支持患者与临床医生之间建立牢固关系的机制。
Health Care Manage Rev. 2023;48(1):23-31. doi: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000346. Epub 2022 May 23.
6
Collaboration and Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Clinicians in Preventive Health Care Decisions and US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.患者与临床医生在预防保健决策中的协作和共同决策,以及美国预防服务工作组的建议。
JAMA. 2022 Mar 22;327(12):1171-1176. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.3267.
7
Patient and Family Engaged Care: An Essential Element of Health Equity.患者及家庭参与式护理:健康公平的关键要素。
NAM Perspect. 2020 Jul 13;2020. doi: 10.31478/202007a. eCollection 2020.
8
Patient engagement in care: A scoping review of recently validated tools assessing patients' and healthcare professionals' preferences and experience.患者参与医疗照护:最近经验证的评估患者和医疗保健专业人员偏好和体验的工具的范围综述。
Health Expect. 2021 Dec;24(6):1924-1935. doi: 10.1111/hex.13344. Epub 2021 Aug 16.
9
Psychometric evaluation of a patient-reported item bank for healthcare engagement.患者报告的参与医疗保健项目量表的心理计量学评估。
Qual Life Res. 2021 Aug;30(8):2363-2374. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02824-2. Epub 2021 Apr 9.
10
A scoping review of the use of visual aids in health education materials for persons with low-literacy levels.在低识字水平人群的健康教育材料中使用视觉辅助工具的范围综述。
Patient Educ Couns. 2021 May;104(5):998-1017. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.11.034. Epub 2020 Nov 27.