The PC is a generic measure of management continuity for patients who regularly see more than one clinician, and who are at risk of discontinuity and fragmented care. The measure was developed in Canada with extensive patient involvement. Initial publication revealed it to be a reliable measure of continuity and coordination of care across the entire system (Haggerty et al. 2012). Patient perception of continuity, as measured by the PC instrument, was strongly and significantly associated with patient satisfaction, but was not associated with costs. The questionnaire consists of 23 statements describing various aspects of an ongoing patient-physician longitudinal relationship. Questions cover two main
factors: (1) structure of health care delivery (11 items) and (2) interpersonal relationship between physician and patients (12 items)
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.
Continuity, coordination, information transfer, organisation
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”.
PROEM
Respondent
?
The person that fills in the questionnaire - e.g. patient, Health Care Professional, or proxy (normally a carer or family member)
The measures can be either generic or disease specific (e.g. Diabetes, Heart Failure)
Generic
Main context tested in
?
The main context in which the measure has been developed and used (E.g. Hopital, General Practice etc).
Primary care
Main countries used in
?
The main countries in which the measure has been developed and used.
Canada
Target age
?
e.g. Adults, Children, Elderly
Adults and older people
Main uses of measure
?
The context in which the measure is most often used – e.g. clinical trials; national surveys.
Designed to assess both positive and negative dimensions of continuity of care across the entire system, and to support patient-centered and relationship-based care.It can be used as a whole or in part to assess coordination and continuity in primary care.
Used in UK?
?
Whether the instrument has been tested and validated within a UK healthcare context.
No
Impact
?
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.
4.5
Language
English
Administration modes
?
E.g. paper, telephone, online
Postal questionnaire
Domains
Domain description
Continuity, coordination, information transfer, organisation
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2
1
4
3
1
11
8
8
6
1
Single point of contact
Care coordination within teams
Care coordination across teams
Generic care planning
Continuity of care
Relational continuity
Behaviour and communication skills
Information sharing
Knowledge of patient
Medication
Psychometrics
Brief description
?
A brief description of the initially reported psychometric properties of the measure.
Face validity of the 23 statements included in the questionnaire was established by a comprehensive review conducted by a group of board-certified family physicians. The Cronbachs alpha was calculated at 0.86, indicating a high degree of internal consistency. A principal component factor analysis was conducted and revealed two main factors (structure of health care delivery and interpersonal relationship between physician and
patients).