Search

Background: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains an important chronic condition worldwide requiring integrated patient-centred care as advocated by the Chronic Care Model (CCM). The Primary Care Networks (PCNs) in Singapore organise general practitioners (GPs) with nurses and care coordinators to deliver team-based care for patients with chronic conditions. This study examined the quality of care in the PCNs as defined by the CCM from the patients' perspective. Methods: This study followed a cross-sectional convergent mixed-method design with T2D patients across three PCN types (GP-led, Group, and Cluster). The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC, range 1-5) was completed by a convenience sample of 343 patients. Multivariate linear regression was performed to estimate the associations between patient and service characteristics and PACIC summary score. Twenty-four participants were purposively recruited for interviews on the experienced care until thematic saturation was reached. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently and independently. Integration occurred during study design and data analysis using the CCM as guidance. Quantitative and qualitative results were compared side-by-side in a joint comparison table to develop key concepts supported by themes, subthemes, and patients' quotes. Results: The PACIC mean summary score of 3.21 for 343 patients evidenced that some have received CCM consistent care in the PCNs. Being younger and spending more time with the GP were associated with higher PACIC summary scores. PACIC summary scores did not differ across PCN types. The 24 patients interviewed in the qualitative study reported receiving team-based care, nurse services, good continuity of care, as well as patient-centred care, convenient access, and affordable care. Key concepts showed that integrated care consistent with the CCM was sometimes received by patients in the PCNs. Patient activation, delivery system design/decision support, goal setting/tailoring, and problem-solving/contextual counselling were sometimes received by patients, while follow-up/coordination was generally not received. Conclusions: Patients with T2D from the Singapore Primary Care Networks received integrated care consistent with the Chronic Care Model, particularly in patient activation, delivery system design/decision support, goal setting/tailoring, and problem-solving/contextual counselling. Follow-up/coordination needed improvement to ensure higher quality of diabetes care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Roles for United States (US)-based community pharmacists in caring for persons with chronic conditions have greatly expanded. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) was developed to assess patients' perspectives of care received. However, successful application of this instrument in community pharmacies is uncertain. The objective of this study was to adapt the PACIC for use in community pharmacies (CP-PACIC), assess validity of the CP-PACIC and examine CP-PACIC scale score differences relative to patient characteristics.Methods: This cross-sectional study surveyed chronically ill adults in Indiana, US who receive care from pharmacists in community pharmacies. The modified CP-PACIC scale consisted of 20-items, which were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (none of the time) to 4 (always). The total possible score ranged from 0 - 80. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to assess performance and dimensionality. CP-PACIC validity, including face validity, construct validity (via exploratory factor analysis) and internal consistency were assessed. Relationships between patient characteristics and scale scores were evaluated using appropriate statistical tests.Results: Five hundred forty-six respondents' data were analyzed. EFA revealed a 2-factor solution (termed advanced pharmacy chronic illness care (AP) and traditional pharmacy chronic illness care (TP) subscales) accounting for 64.7% of variance; all 20 items were retained. The total 20-item CP-PACIC scale had a Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency) of 0.96; with a 12-item AP subscale Cronbach's alpha of 0.97 and 8-item TP subscale Cronbach's alpha of 0.89. Median total score was 12.0 [interquartile range = 27.3]. Median CP-PACIC sores varied across many respondent demographics (i.e., survey administration type, age, sex, education, health condition, number of pharmacy services received, community pharmacy type) such as whether respondents participated in one or more pharmacy service or not (29 vs. 10; p < .001).Conclusions: Unlike the original 5-subscale (patient activation, delivery system design, goal setting, problem solving, and follow-up/coordination) PACIC, analysis demonstrated a 2-factor (AP, TP) solution for the CP-PACIC scale with good internal consistency. As there are no standardized evaluation tools that exist, community pharmacies could find great value in using this CP-PACIC tool to benchmark performance and inform quality improvement strategies for patient care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Traditional and Complementary Medicine (TCM) is widely used particularly among patients with chronic diseases in primary care. However, evidence is lacking regarding TCM use among patients with Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) and its association with patients' experience on chronic disease conventional care that they receive. Therefore, this study aims to determine the prevalence and pattern of TCM use, compare the patients' experience of chronic disease care using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care - Malay version (PACIC-M) questionnaire between TCM users and non-users and determine the factors associated with TCM use among patients with MetS in primary care. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a university primary care clinic. Patients aged 18 to 80 years old with MetS were recruited. Socio-demographic characteristic, clinical characteristics and information on TCM use and its pattern were recorded in a proforma. Patient's experience of chronic disease conventional care was measured using PACIC-M questionnaire. The comparison of PACIC-M mean score between TCM users and non-users was measured using independent t-test. The factors associated with TCM use were determined by simple logistic regression (SLogR), followed by multiple logistic regression (MLogR). Results: Out of 394 participants, 381 (96.7%) were included in the final analysis. Of the 381 participants, 255 (66.9%) were TCM users (95% CI 62.7, 71.7). Only 36.9% of users disclosed about TCM use to their health care providers (HCP). The overall mean PACIC-M score was 2.91 (SD ± 0.04). TCM users had significantly higher mean PACIC-M score compared to non-users (2.98 ± 0.74 vs 2.75 ± 0.72, p = 0.01). The independent factors associated with TCM use were being female (Adj. OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.55, 4.06), having high education level (Adj. OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.37, 3.41) and having high overall PACIC-M mean score (Adj. OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10, 2.03). Conclusion: TCM use was highly prevalent in this primary care clinic. However, the disclosure rate of TCM use to HCP was low. Females, those with high education and high PACIC-M mean score were more likely to use TCM. Further research should explore the reasons for their TCM use, despite having good experience in conventional chronic disease care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]