Patients' assessment of chronic illness care : a validation study among patients with type 2 diabetes in Finland

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Simonsen, Nina
dc.contributor.author Koponen, Anne M.
dc.contributor.author Suominen, Sakari
dc.date.accessioned 2018-06-21T08:32:00Z
dc.date.available 2018-06-21T08:32:00Z
dc.date.issued 2018-06-05
dc.identifier.citation Simonsen , N , Koponen , A M & Suominen , S 2018 , ' Patients' assessment of chronic illness care : a validation study among patients with type 2 diabetes in Finland ' , BMC Health Services Research , vol. 18 , 412 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3206-7
dc.identifier.other PURE: 107997064
dc.identifier.other PURE UUID: 6d868bc8-36e3-4f6a-bc20-3b34bd3e010d
dc.identifier.other WOS: 000434285400006
dc.identifier.other Scopus: 85048073148
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10138/236583
dc.description.abstract Background: To meet the challenges of the rising prevalence of chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, new approaches to healthcare delivery have been initiated; among these the influential Chronic Care Model (CCM). Valid instruments are needed to evaluate the public health impact of these frameworks in different countries. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) is a 20-item quality of care measure that, from the perspective of the patient, measures the extent to which care is congruent with the CCM. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Finnish translation of the PACIC questionnaire, in terms of validity and reliability, in a large register-based sample of patients with type 2 diabetes. Method: The PACIC items were translated into Finnish in a standardized forward-backward procedure, followed by a cross-sectional survey among patients with type 2 diabetes (response rate 56%; n = 2866). We assessed the Finnish version of the PACIC scale for the following psychometric properties: content validity, internal consistency reliability, convergent and construct validity. We also present descriptive data on total scale as well as predetermined subscale levels. Results: The item-response on the PACIC scale was high with only small numbers of missing data (0.5-1.1%). Ceiling effects were low (0.3-5.3%) whereas floor effects were over 20% for two of the predetermined subscales (problem solving and follow-up/coordination). The total PACIC scale showed a reasonable distribution and excellent internal consistency (alpha 0.94) while the internal consistency of the subscales were at least acceptable (0.74-0.86). The principal component analysis identified a two-or three-factor solution instead of the proposed five-dimensional. In other respects, the PACIC scale showed the hypothesized relationships with quality of care and outcome measures, thus demonstrating convergent and construct validity. Conclusion: A Finnish version of the PACIC scale is now validated in the primary care setting among patients with type 2 diabetes. The findings suggest comparable psychometric properties of the Finnish scale as of the original English instrument and earlier translations, and reasonable levels of validity and reliability. en
dc.format.extent 10
dc.language.iso eng
dc.relation.ispartof BMC Health Services Research
dc.rights cc_by
dc.rights.uri info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject Chronic care model
dc.subject PACIC
dc.subject Primary care
dc.subject Quality of care
dc.subject Type 2 diabetes
dc.subject Validation
dc.subject HEALTH-STATUS
dc.subject QUALITY
dc.subject QUESTIONNAIRE
dc.subject VERSION
dc.subject 3121 General medicine, internal medicine and other clinical medicine
dc.subject 3142 Public health care science, environmental and occupational health
dc.title Patients' assessment of chronic illness care : a validation study among patients with type 2 diabetes in Finland en
dc.type Article
dc.contributor.organization Clinicum
dc.contributor.organization Department of Public Health
dc.contributor.organization University of Helsinki
dc.contributor.organization HUS Head and Neck Center
dc.description.reviewstatus Peer reviewed
dc.relation.doi https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3206-7
dc.relation.issn 1472-6963
dc.rights.accesslevel openAccess
dc.type.version publishedVersion

Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
s12913_018_3206_7.pdf 625.2Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record