Patient perspective on coronary artery disease care

    Authors

    Keywords

    patients, coronary artery disease, assessment of chronic illness, quality of care

    DOI

    https://doi.org/10.15836/ccar.2015.220

    Full Text

    Background: Patient's perspective of the management of their chronic disease better reflects the quality of care and offers health-care professionals more feedback. ( 1 , 2 ) Methods and Patients: The study was cross-sectional, included 423 patients with coronary artery disease. A comprehensive questionnaire for patients included the European Task Force for Patient Evaluation of General Practice (EUROPEP) instrument and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire. To identify the number and types of data sets, factorial analysis and descriptive statistics were conducted on the PACIC questionnaire. To determine the correlation between the patient's assessment of the management of their chronic disease and the quality of care, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used. Results: The average age of the participants was 68.0 years (SD = 10.8); 35.2% were female. The average score for the entire PACIC (on a scale of 1-5) was 3.2 (SD = 0.9). The highest scores were for organizational aspects: organization of the practice (3.7), involvement of patients (3.7), and problem solving (3.5); the lowest score was for patient follow-up (2.7) ( Tables 1 , 2 and 3 , Figure 1 ). The Pearson's correlation coefficient ( Table 4 ) was 0.11 (p = 0.034). SD = standard deviation; Min = response rate with the lowest score - Floor effect; Max: response rate with the highest score - Ceiling effect PACIC = Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire Quality of coronary patient care - family doctor advice given and recorded. Items from 0 to 5 is the number of advice given and recorded in the past 15 months. Frequencies represent the number of patients who have received a certain number of tips and measures included in coronary patient care processes. The variable is distributed by the central peak. *r = Pearson's correlation coefficient; PACIC = Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire Discussion: The PACIC questionnaire is a reliable tool for assessing the management of chronic diseases. The average PACIC score was higher than the average scores of patients with other diseases in other countries. The proportion of those with the highest and lowest scores (floor and ceiling effect) was comparable with a Dutch study. The quality of clinical care was positively correlated with the patient's assessment of that care, which may represent a new indicator of quality of care of chronic diseases. Patient experience and involvement are essential to achieve better quality. In the future, further research is needed to accurately identify individual elements of the evaluation instrument.

    Cardiologia Croatica
    Back to search

    Patient perspective on coronary artery disease care

    Abstract
    Issue9-10
    Published
    Pages220-221
    PDF via DOIhttps://doi.org/10.15836/ccar.2015.220
    patients
    coronary artery disease
    assessment of chronic illness
    quality of care

    Authors

    Ksenija Tušek Bunc*ORCIDSlovenia

    Full Text

    Background: Patient's perspective of the management of their chronic disease better reflects the quality of care and offers health-care professionals more feedback. ( 1 , 2 ) Methods and Patients: The study was cross-sectional, included 423 patients with coronary artery disease. A comprehensive questionnaire for patients included the European Task Force for Patient Evaluation of General Practice (EUROPEP) instrument and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire. To identify the number and types of data sets, factorial analysis and descriptive statistics were conducted on the PACIC questionnaire. To determine the correlation between the patient's assessment of the management of their chronic disease and the quality of care, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used. Results: The average age of the participants was 68.0 years (SD = 10.8); 35.2% were female. The average score for the entire PACIC (on a scale of 1-5) was 3.2 (SD = 0.9). The highest scores were for organizational aspects: organization of the practice (3.7), involvement of patients (3.7), and problem solving (3.5); the lowest score was for patient follow-up (2.7) ( Tables 1 , 2 and 3 , Figure 1 ). The Pearson's correlation coefficient ( Table 4 ) was 0.11 (p = 0.034). SD = standard deviation; Min = response rate with the lowest score - Floor effect; Max: response rate with the highest score - Ceiling effect PACIC = Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire Quality of coronary patient care - family doctor advice given and recorded. Items from 0 to 5 is the number of advice given and recorded in the past 15 months. Frequencies represent the number of patients who have received a certain number of tips and measures included in coronary patient care processes. The variable is distributed by the central peak. *r = Pearson's correlation coefficient; PACIC = Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire Discussion: The PACIC questionnaire is a reliable tool for assessing the management of chronic diseases. The average PACIC score was higher than the average scores of patients with other diseases in other countries. The proportion of those with the highest and lowest scores (floor and ceiling effect) was comparable with a Dutch study. The quality of clinical care was positively correlated with the patient's assessment of that care, which may represent a new indicator of quality of care of chronic diseases. Patient experience and involvement are essential to achieve better quality. In the future, further research is needed to accurately identify individual elements of the evaluation instrument.