Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)

Rationale: There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; probl...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical care 2005-05, Vol.43 (5), p.436-444
Hauptverfasser: Glasgow, Russell E., Wagner, Edward H., Schaefer, Judith, Mahoney, Lisa D., Reid, Robert J., Greene, Sarah M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 444
container_issue 5
container_start_page 436
container_title Medical care
container_volume 43
creator Glasgow, Russell E.
Wagner, Edward H.
Schaefer, Judith
Mahoney, Lisa D.
Reid, Robert J.
Greene, Sarah M.
description Rationale: There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; problem-solving and follow-up support. Sample: A total of 283 adults reporting one or more chronic illness from a large integrated health care delivery system were studied. Methods: Participants completed the 20-item Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) as well as measures of demographic factors, a patient activation scale, and subscales from a primary care assessment instrument so that we could evaluate measurement performance, construct, and concurrent validity of the PACIC. Results: The PACIC consists of 5 scales and an overall summary score, each having good internal consistency for brief scales. As predicted, the PACIC was only slightly correlated with age and gender, and unrelated to education. Contrary to prediction, it was only slightly correlated (r = 0.13) with number of chronic conditions. The PACIC demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability (r = 0.58 during the course of 3 months) and was correlated moderately, as predicted (r = 0.32-0.60, median = 0.50, P < 0.001) to measures of primary care and patient activation. Discussion: The PACIC appears to be a practical instrument that is reliable and has face, construct, and concurrent validity. The resulting questionnaire is in the public domain, and recommendations for its use in research and quality improvement are outlined.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/01.mlr.0000160375.47920.8c
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67751489</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3768396</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3768396</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4763-623332881da60282a33252f9e226e2082d47294a119b30e9e14b7851547cb4533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkE1v1DAQhi0EotvCP0Ao6gHBIWH8bfe2CgVWqkQPhavlTWa1WZxksRMq_j3eD1EJ-zCameedsV9CrilUFKz-CLTqQ6wgH6qAa1kJbRlUpnlGFlRyXVIrzHOyAGCy1KDtBblMaZdxzSV7SS6oNNwI0Avy8Al_Yxj3PQ5T4Ye2-OFD1_qpG4di3BTTFov7nB26y5QwpSOYO_U2jkPXFKsQhlwuah-xeH-_rFf1h1fkxcaHhK_P8Yp8_3z7UH8t7759WdXLu7IRWvFSMc45M4a2XgEzzOdMso1FxhQyMKwVmlnhKbVrDmiRirU2kkqhm7WQnF-Rd6e5-zj-mjFNru9SgyH4Acc5OaW1pMLYDF7_B-7GOQ75bY6BFspIITJ0c4KaOKYUceP2set9_OMouIPxDqjLxrsn493ReGeaLH573jCve2yfpGenMyBOwOMYJozpZ5gfMbot-jBtjyOlklCyHPMFKA-lwxffnGS7NI3x31iuleFW8b-l_pUL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>207468544</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Glasgow, Russell E. ; Wagner, Edward H. ; Schaefer, Judith ; Mahoney, Lisa D. ; Reid, Robert J. ; Greene, Sarah M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Glasgow, Russell E. ; Wagner, Edward H. ; Schaefer, Judith ; Mahoney, Lisa D. ; Reid, Robert J. ; Greene, Sarah M.</creatorcontrib><description>Rationale: There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; problem-solving and follow-up support. Sample: A total of 283 adults reporting one or more chronic illness from a large integrated health care delivery system were studied. Methods: Participants completed the 20-item Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) as well as measures of demographic factors, a patient activation scale, and subscales from a primary care assessment instrument so that we could evaluate measurement performance, construct, and concurrent validity of the PACIC. Results: The PACIC consists of 5 scales and an overall summary score, each having good internal consistency for brief scales. As predicted, the PACIC was only slightly correlated with age and gender, and unrelated to education. Contrary to prediction, it was only slightly correlated (r = 0.13) with number of chronic conditions. The PACIC demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability (r = 0.58 during the course of 3 months) and was correlated moderately, as predicted (r = 0.32-0.60, median = 0.50, P &lt; 0.001) to measures of primary care and patient activation. Discussion: The PACIC appears to be a practical instrument that is reliable and has face, construct, and concurrent validity. The resulting questionnaire is in the public domain, and recommendations for its use in research and quality improvement are outlined.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-7079</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-1948</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000160375.47920.8c</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15838407</identifier><identifier>CODEN: MELAAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</publisher><subject>Age ; Age Factors ; Chronic Disease - therapy ; Chronic diseases ; Chronic illnesses ; Comorbidity ; Delivery of Health Care, Integrated - standards ; Demography ; Diabetes ; Disease Management ; Factor Analysis, Statistical ; Female ; Goal setting ; Health care ; Health care delivery ; Humans ; Idaho ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Models, Organizational ; Patient assessment ; Patient care ; Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Patient-Centered Care - organization &amp; administration ; Patients ; Primary health care ; Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration ; Primary Health Care - standards ; Psychometrics - instrumentation ; Quality of Health Care ; Quality of service ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sex Factors ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Washington</subject><ispartof>Medical care, 2005-05, Vol.43 (5), p.436-444</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2005 Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</rights><rights>2005 Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins May 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4763-623332881da60282a33252f9e226e2082d47294a119b30e9e14b7851547cb4533</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4763-623332881da60282a33252f9e226e2082d47294a119b30e9e14b7851547cb4533</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3768396$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3768396$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15838407$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Glasgow, Russell E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagner, Edward H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaefer, Judith</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahoney, Lisa D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reid, Robert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greene, Sarah M.</creatorcontrib><title>Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)</title><title>Medical care</title><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><description>Rationale: There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; problem-solving and follow-up support. Sample: A total of 283 adults reporting one or more chronic illness from a large integrated health care delivery system were studied. Methods: Participants completed the 20-item Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) as well as measures of demographic factors, a patient activation scale, and subscales from a primary care assessment instrument so that we could evaluate measurement performance, construct, and concurrent validity of the PACIC. Results: The PACIC consists of 5 scales and an overall summary score, each having good internal consistency for brief scales. As predicted, the PACIC was only slightly correlated with age and gender, and unrelated to education. Contrary to prediction, it was only slightly correlated (r = 0.13) with number of chronic conditions. The PACIC demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability (r = 0.58 during the course of 3 months) and was correlated moderately, as predicted (r = 0.32-0.60, median = 0.50, P &lt; 0.001) to measures of primary care and patient activation. Discussion: The PACIC appears to be a practical instrument that is reliable and has face, construct, and concurrent validity. The resulting questionnaire is in the public domain, and recommendations for its use in research and quality improvement are outlined.</description><subject>Age</subject><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Chronic Disease - therapy</subject><subject>Chronic diseases</subject><subject>Chronic illnesses</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care, Integrated - standards</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Diabetes</subject><subject>Disease Management</subject><subject>Factor Analysis, Statistical</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Goal setting</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health care delivery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Idaho</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Models, Organizational</subject><subject>Patient assessment</subject><subject>Patient care</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Patient-Centered Care - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Primary health care</subject><subject>Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Primary Health Care - standards</subject><subject>Psychometrics - instrumentation</subject><subject>Quality of Health Care</subject><subject>Quality of service</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Washington</subject><issn>0025-7079</issn><issn>1537-1948</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkE1v1DAQhi0EotvCP0Ao6gHBIWH8bfe2CgVWqkQPhavlTWa1WZxksRMq_j3eD1EJ-zCameedsV9CrilUFKz-CLTqQ6wgH6qAa1kJbRlUpnlGFlRyXVIrzHOyAGCy1KDtBblMaZdxzSV7SS6oNNwI0Avy8Al_Yxj3PQ5T4Ye2-OFD1_qpG4di3BTTFov7nB26y5QwpSOYO_U2jkPXFKsQhlwuah-xeH-_rFf1h1fkxcaHhK_P8Yp8_3z7UH8t7759WdXLu7IRWvFSMc45M4a2XgEzzOdMso1FxhQyMKwVmlnhKbVrDmiRirU2kkqhm7WQnF-Rd6e5-zj-mjFNru9SgyH4Acc5OaW1pMLYDF7_B-7GOQ75bY6BFspIITJ0c4KaOKYUceP2set9_OMouIPxDqjLxrsn493ReGeaLH573jCve2yfpGenMyBOwOMYJozpZ5gfMbot-jBtjyOlklCyHPMFKA-lwxffnGS7NI3x31iuleFW8b-l_pUL</recordid><startdate>20050501</startdate><enddate>20050501</enddate><creator>Glasgow, Russell E.</creator><creator>Wagner, Edward H.</creator><creator>Schaefer, Judith</creator><creator>Mahoney, Lisa D.</creator><creator>Reid, Robert J.</creator><creator>Greene, Sarah M.</creator><general>J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050501</creationdate><title>Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)</title><author>Glasgow, Russell E. ; Wagner, Edward H. ; Schaefer, Judith ; Mahoney, Lisa D. ; Reid, Robert J. ; Greene, Sarah M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4763-623332881da60282a33252f9e226e2082d47294a119b30e9e14b7851547cb4533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Age</topic><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Chronic Disease - therapy</topic><topic>Chronic diseases</topic><topic>Chronic illnesses</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care, Integrated - standards</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Diabetes</topic><topic>Disease Management</topic><topic>Factor Analysis, Statistical</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Goal setting</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health care delivery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Idaho</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Models, Organizational</topic><topic>Patient assessment</topic><topic>Patient care</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Patient-Centered Care - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Primary health care</topic><topic>Primary Health Care - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Primary Health Care - standards</topic><topic>Psychometrics - instrumentation</topic><topic>Quality of Health Care</topic><topic>Quality of service</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Washington</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Glasgow, Russell E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagner, Edward H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaefer, Judith</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahoney, Lisa D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reid, Robert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greene, Sarah M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Glasgow, Russell E.</au><au>Wagner, Edward H.</au><au>Schaefer, Judith</au><au>Mahoney, Lisa D.</au><au>Reid, Robert J.</au><au>Greene, Sarah M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)</atitle><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><date>2005-05-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>436</spage><epage>444</epage><pages>436-444</pages><issn>0025-7079</issn><eissn>1537-1948</eissn><coden>MELAAD</coden><abstract>Rationale: There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; problem-solving and follow-up support. Sample: A total of 283 adults reporting one or more chronic illness from a large integrated health care delivery system were studied. Methods: Participants completed the 20-item Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) as well as measures of demographic factors, a patient activation scale, and subscales from a primary care assessment instrument so that we could evaluate measurement performance, construct, and concurrent validity of the PACIC. Results: The PACIC consists of 5 scales and an overall summary score, each having good internal consistency for brief scales. As predicted, the PACIC was only slightly correlated with age and gender, and unrelated to education. Contrary to prediction, it was only slightly correlated (r = 0.13) with number of chronic conditions. The PACIC demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability (r = 0.58 during the course of 3 months) and was correlated moderately, as predicted (r = 0.32-0.60, median = 0.50, P &lt; 0.001) to measures of primary care and patient activation. Discussion: The PACIC appears to be a practical instrument that is reliable and has face, construct, and concurrent validity. The resulting questionnaire is in the public domain, and recommendations for its use in research and quality improvement are outlined.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</pub><pmid>15838407</pmid><doi>10.1097/01.mlr.0000160375.47920.8c</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0025-7079
ispartof Medical care, 2005-05, Vol.43 (5), p.436-444
issn 0025-7079
1537-1948
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67751489
source Jstor Complete Legacy; MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Age
Age Factors
Chronic Disease - therapy
Chronic diseases
Chronic illnesses
Comorbidity
Delivery of Health Care, Integrated - standards
Demography
Diabetes
Disease Management
Factor Analysis, Statistical
Female
Goal setting
Health care
Health care delivery
Humans
Idaho
Male
Middle Aged
Models, Organizational
Patient assessment
Patient care
Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data
Patient-Centered Care - organization & administration
Patients
Primary health care
Primary Health Care - organization & administration
Primary Health Care - standards
Psychometrics - instrumentation
Quality of Health Care
Quality of service
Reproducibility of Results
Sex Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
Washington
title Development and Validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T15%3A29%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20and%20Validation%20of%20the%20Patient%20Assessment%20of%20Chronic%20Illness%20Care%20(PACIC)&rft.jtitle=Medical%20care&rft.au=Glasgow,%20Russell%20E.&rft.date=2005-05-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=436&rft.epage=444&rft.pages=436-444&rft.issn=0025-7079&rft.eissn=1537-1948&rft.coden=MELAAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/01.mlr.0000160375.47920.8c&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3768396%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=207468544&rft_id=info:pmid/15838407&rft_jstor_id=3768396&rfr_iscdi=true