首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy >Quality of integrated chronic care measured by patient survey: identification selection and application of most appropriate instruments
【2h】

Quality of integrated chronic care measured by patient survey: identification selection and application of most appropriate instruments

机译:通过患者调查测量的综合慢性护理质量:最合适的仪器的识别选择和应用

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective  To identify the most appropriate generic instrument to measure experience and/or satisfaction of people receiving integrated chronic care. >Background  Health care is becoming more user‐centred and, as a result, the experience of users of care and evaluation of their experience and/or satisfaction is taken more seriously. It is unclear to what extent existing instruments are appropriate in measuring the experience and/or satisfaction of people using integrated chronic care. >Methods  Instruments were identified by means of a systematic literature review. Appropriateness of instruments was analysed on seven criteria. The two most promising instruments were translated into Dutch, if necessary, and administered to a convenience sample of 109 people with a chronic illness. Data derived from respondents were analysed statistically. Focus‐group interviews were conducted to assess the semantic and technical equivalence as well as opinions of people about the applicability and relevance of the translated instruments. >Results  From 37 instruments identified, the Patients’ Assessment of Care for chronIc Conditions (PACIC) and the short form of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire III (PSQ‐18) were selected as most promising instruments. Both instruments produced similar median scores across people with different chronic conditions. The overall PACIC and its subscales and the overall PSQ‐18 were highly internally consistent, but not the PSQ‐18 subscales. Overall, the PACIC demonstrated better psychometric characteristics. PACIC and PSQ‐18 scores were found to be moderately correlated. Whereas more respondents preferred the PSQ‐18, focus‐group participants regarded the PACIC to be more applicable and relevant. The technical and semantic equivalence of both instruments were sufficient. >Conclusions  Because of its psychometric characteristics, perceived applicability and relevance, the PACIC is the most appropriate instrument to measure the experience of people receiving integrated chronic care.
机译:>目的:确定最合适的通用工具来衡量接受综合慢性护理人员的经验和/或满意度。 >背景医疗保健正变得越来越以用户为中心,因此,医疗保健用户的体验以及对他们的体验和/或满意度的评估也越来越受到重视。目前尚不清楚现有工具在多大程度上适合使用综合慢性护理来衡量人们的经验和/或满意度。 >方法通过系统的文献综述鉴定了仪器。根据七个标准分析了仪器的适当性。如有必要,将两个最有前途的工具翻译成荷兰语,并提供给109名患有慢性病的人的方便样本。对来自受访者的数据进行了统计分析。进行了焦点小组访谈,以评估语义和技术上的等效性以及人们对翻译工具的适用性和相关性的意见。 >结果从确定的37项工具中,最有希望的工具被选为“患者对慢性病的护理评估(PACIC)”和“ III期患者满意度调查表”(PSQ-18)的简称。两种仪器在不同慢性病患者中产生的中位数得分相似。总体PACIC及其子量表和PSQ-18的整体内部高度一致,但PSQ-18子量表的内部高度一致。总体而言,PACIC表现出更好的心理测量特征。发现PACIC和PSQ-18得分具有中等相关性。尽管更多的受访者更喜欢PSQ-18,但焦点小组参与者认为PACIC更适用和相关。两种工具在技术和语义上都等效。 >结论由于PACIC的心理测量特点,可感知的适用性和相关性,它是衡量接受综合慢性护理人员经验的最合适工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号