Open AccessAssociation between patient activation and patient‐assessed quality of care in type 2 diabetes: results of a longitudinal study
Author(s) -
Aung Eindra,
Donald Maria,
Coll Joseph R.,
Williams Gail M.,
Doi Suhail A. R.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
health expectations
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.314
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1369-7625
pISSN - 1369-6513
DOI - 10.1111/hex.12359
Subject(s) - medicine , patient satisfaction , cohort , quality of life (healthcare) , patient experience , wilcoxon signed rank test , minimal clinically important difference , patient centered outcomes , type 2 diabetes , prospective cohort study , population , physical therapy , diabetes mellitus , health care , randomized controlled trial , nursing , mann–whitney u test , environmental health , endocrinology , economics , economic growth
Background Previous research using cross‐sectional data has shown a positive relationship between patient activation and quality of care. The quantitative relationships in the same patients over time, however, remain undefined. Objective To examine the relationship between changes in activation over time and patient‐assessed quality of chronic illness care. Design Prospective cohort study. Participants The study used data reported annually from 2008 ( N = 3761) to 2010 ( N = 3040), using self‐report survey questionnaires, completed by patients with type 2 diabetes in a population‐based cohort in Q ueensland, A ustralia. Main Measures Principal measures were the 13‐item P atient A ctivation M easure ( PAM ), and the 20‐item P atient A ssessment of C hronic I llness C are ( PACIC ) instrument. Methods Nonparametric anova was used to determine the association between patient activation and patient‐assessed quality of care in low and high patient activation groups at baseline (2008), and in 2009 and 2010, when patients had changed group membership. The W ilcoxon signed ranks test was used to compare the PACIC scores between baseline and each follow‐up survey for the same patient activation level. Results Patient activation was positively associated with the median PACIC score within each survey year and within each of the groups defined at baseline (high‐ and low‐activation groups; P < 0.001). Conclusions Patient activation and the PACIC change in the same direction and should be considered together in the interpretation of patient care assessment. This can be carried out by interpreting PACIC scores within strata of PAM .