The operational definition of first-contact accessibility is "the ease with which a person can obtain needed care (including advice and support) from the practitioner of choice within a time frame appropriate to the urgency of the problem"; accommodation is "the way healthcare resources are organized to accommodate a wide range of patients' abilities to contact healthcare providers and reach healthcare services, that is to say telephone services, flexible appointment systems, hours of operation, and walk-in periods." Objective: To compare how well accessibility is measured in validated subscales that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient' s perspective. Method: 645 adults with at least one healthcare contact in the previous 12 months responded to six instruments that evaluate primary healthcare with four subscales that measure accessibility: the Primary Care Assessment survey (PCAs), the Primary Care Assessment Toolshort Form (PCAT-s, two subscales) and the first version of the EuROPEP (EuROPEP-I). scores were normalized to a 0-to-10 scale for descriptive comparison. Exploratory and confirmatory (structural equation modelling) factor analysis examined fit to operational definition, and item response theory analysis examined item performance on common constructs.Results: The subscales demonstrate similar psychometric measures to those reported by developers. The PCAT-s First-Contact utilization subscale does not fit the accessibility construct. The remaining three subscales load reasonably onto a single factor, presumed to be accessibility, but the best-fitting model has two factors: "timeliness of obtaining needed care" (PCAT-s First-Contact Access, some EuROPEP-I items) and "how resources are organized to accommodate clients" (PCAs Organizational Access and most of EuROPEP-I organization of care). Items in the PCAs and PCAT-s subscales have good discriminability. Conclusion: Only three of the four subscales measure accessibility; all are appropriate for use in Canada. The PCAT-s First-Contact Access subscale is the best measure for first-contact accessibility, and PCAs Organizational Accessibility has good metric properties and measures for accommodation. RésuméLa définition opérationnelle de l' accessibilité de premier contact est « la facilité avec laquelle une personne peut obtenir les services requis (y compris des conseils et du soutien) du clinicien de son choix dans un délai approprié à l'urgence du problème »; l' accommodation est[96] HEALTHCARE POLICY Vol. 7 Special Issue, 2011 Jeannie L. Haggerty et al.
Comprehensiveness relates both to scope of services offered and to a whole-person clinical approach. Comprehensive services are defined as "the provision, either directly or indirectly, of a full range of services to meet most patients' healthcare needs"; whole-person care is "the extent to which a provider elicits and considers the physical, emotional and social aspects of a patient' s health and considers the community context in their care." Among instruments that evaluate primary healthcare, two had subscales that mapped to comprehensive services and to the community component of whole-person care: the Primary Care Assessment Tool -short Form (PCAT-s) and the Components of Primary Care Index (CPCI, a limited measure of whole-person care). Objective: To examine how well comprehensiveness is captured in validated instruments that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient' s perspective. Method: 645 adults with at least one healthcare contact in the previous 12 months responded to six instruments that evaluate primary healthcare. scores were normalized for descriptive comparison. Exploratory and confirmatory (structural equation modelling) factor analysis examined fit to operational definition, and item response theory analysis examined item performance on common constructs. Results: Over one-quarter of respondents had missing responses on services offered or doctor' s knowledge of the community. The subscales did not load on a single factor; comprehensive services and community orientation were examined separately. The community orientation subscales did not perform satisfactorily. The three comprehensive services subscales fit very modestly onto two factors: (1) most healthcare needs (from one provider) (CPCI Comprehensive Care, PCAT-s First-Contact utilization) and (2) range of services (PCAT-s Comprehensive services Available). Individual item performance revealed several problems. Conclusion: measurement of comprehensiveness is problematic, making this attribute a priority for measure development. Range of services offered is best obtained from providers. Wholeperson care is not addressed as a separate construct, but some dimensions are covered by attributes such as interpersonal communication and relational continuity. RésuméLa notion de globalité des soins s' applique tant à l' étendue des services offerts qu' à une approche holistique des soins cliniques. La globalité des services se définit comme « la prestation, directe ou indirecte, d'une gamme complète de services afin de répondre aux besoins des patients en matière de soins de santé »; les soins centrés sur le patient se définissent par « l' étendue selon dans laquelle le fournisseur de soins considère les aspects physiques, émotionnels et sociaux de la santé d'un patient et tient compte du contexte communautaire lors de la prestation de soins. » deux des instruments d' évaluation des soins primaires com- Objectif : Examiner dans quelle mesure la globalité des soins est captée par les instruments validés qui servent à évaluer les soins d...
La communication interpersonnelle du point de vue du patient : comparaison entre instruments d' évaluation des soins de santé primaires mARIE-d OmI NIquE BEAuLIEu, md, m sC
This small study demonstrates a substantial variation in patient's preferences with regard to postoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Further studies in the preoperative setting are warranted.
Evaluating the extent to which groups or subgroups of individuals differ with respect to primary healthcare experience depends on first ruling out the possibility of bias. Objective: To determine whether item or subscale performance differs systematically between French/English, high/low education subgroups and urban/rural residency. Method: A sample of 645 adult users balanced by French/English language (in quebec and Nova scotia, respectively), high/low education and urban/rural residency responded to six validated instruments: the Primary Care Assessment survey (PCAs); the Primary Care Assessment Tool -short Form (PCAT-s); the Components of Primary Care Index (CPCI); the first version of the EuROPEP (EuROPEP-I); the Interpersonal Processes of Care survey, version II (IPC-II); and part of the veterans Affairs National Outpatient Customer satisfaction survey (vANOCss). We normalized subscale scores to a 0-to-10 scale and tested for between-group differences using ANOvA tests. We used a parametric item response model to test for differences between subgroups in item discriminability and item difficulty. We re-examined group differences after removing items with differential item functioning. Results: Experience of care was assessed more positively in the English-speaking (Nova scotia) than in the French-speaking (quebec) respondents. We found differential English/French item functioning in 48% of the 153 items: discriminability in 20% and differential difficulty in 28%. English items were more discriminating generally than the French. Removing problematic items did not change the differences in French/English assessments. differential item functioning by high/low education status affected 27% of items, with items being generally more discriminating in high-education groups. Between-group comparisons were unchanged. In contrast, only 9% of items showed differential item functioning by geography, affecting principally the accessibility attribute. Removing problematic items reversed a previously nonsignificant finding, revealing poorer first-contact access in rural than in urban areas. Conclusion: differential item functioning does not bias or invalidate French/English comparisons on subscales, but additional development is required to make French and English items equivalent. These instruments are relatively robust by educational status and geography, but results suggest potential differences in the underlying construct in low-education and rural respondents.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.