Measures patient perception of physician communication skills. Uses 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree).Caputres both patient and doctor perceptions of communication.
PCCC or QoL?
This compendium contains patient-reported measures that are either designed to specifically measure aspects of Person Centred Co-Ordinated Care (P3C), or alternatively tools that are designed to measure some aspect of Quality of Life (QoL) or Health Related Quality of Life (hrQoL). All the measures in this compendium have been broadly categorised into one of those two concepts.
Person Centred Coordinated Care
Main Domains Measured
This is the key domains that the measure is targeting.
Type of measure
The measures in this compendium can take a variety of forms. Generally, they will be either Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) or Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM). However, we have also included a few measures that are completed by proxy-individual (PROXY), which are useful in instances where the respondent cannot answer directly (e.g. dementia or end of life). Sometimes, these measures can even be a composite of these types, and target both experiences and outcomes – we have labelled these measures “PROEMs”.
The person that fills in the questionnaire - e.g. patient, Health Care Professional, or proxy (normally a carer or family member)
Copy of questionnaire
measure within this document
The year in which the measure was first published.
Country developed in
The main country[s] in which the measure was first developed.
The publication in which the measure was originally published.
A link to the developer of the measure, if they have a website.
measure within this document
The measures can be either generic or disease specific (e.g. Diabetes, Heart Failure)
Main context tested in
The main context in which the measure has been developed and used (E.g. Hopital, General Practice etc).
Main countries used in
The main countries in which the measure has been developed and used.
e.g. Adults, Children, Elderly
Main uses of measure
The context in which the measure is most often used – e.g. clinical trials; national surveys.
Assessment of communication skills between patient and physician.
Used in UK?
Whether the instrument has been tested and validated within a UK healthcare context.
A crude indication of the impact of the measure on academia. This is the number of times the original publication has been cited on PubMed, divided/normalised to the years since publication.
Generic care planning
Shared decision making
Behaviour and communication skills
A brief description of the initially reported psychometric properties of the measure.
The original development paper reported that a principle components analysis indicated that 2 factors, process and content, accounted for 52% and 7% of the doctor variance and 60% and 6% of the patient variance, respectively. The linear regression showed that only gender accounted for any of the variance in ratings. Cronbach's alphas for both doctor and patient questionnaires were > or = 0.96. The G analysis provided a G = 0.98 and 0.40 (standard errors of 0.003 and 0.02) for doctors and patients, respectively. A more recent study (Stoddard, 2014) reported that The MPI demonstrated construct validity when it was used with practicing physicians; however, its validity was found to be sensitive to both the medical context (e.g. inpatient setting) and social context (e.g. adults, English speaking patients) in which it is used. Acceptability reliability was only established when a large number of responses were available.