Interpersonal communication from the patient perspective: Comparison of primary healthcare evaluation instruments

Marie Dominique Beaulieu, Jeanie L. Haggerty, Christine Beaulieu, Fatima Bouharaoui, Jean Frédéric Lévesque, Raynald Pineault, Frederick Burge, Darcy A. Santor

Résultat de recherche: Articleexamen par les pairs

31 Citations (Scopus)

Résumé

The operational definition of interpersonal communication is "the ability of the provider to elicit and understand patient concerns, to explain healthcare issues and to engage in shared decision-making if desired."Objective: To examine how well interpersonal communication is captured in validated instruments that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient's perspective. Method: 645 adults with at least one healthcare contact in the previous 12 months responded to instruments that evaluate primary healthcare. Eight subscales measure interpersonal communication: the Primary Care Assessment Survey (PCAS, two subscales); the Components of Primary Care Index (CPCI, one subscale); the first version of the EUROPEP (EUROPEP-I); and the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey, version II (IPC-II, four subscales). Scores were normalized for descriptive comparison. Exploratory and confirmatory (structural equation) factor analysis examined fit to operational definition, and item response theory analysis examined item performance. Results: Items not pertaining to interpersonal communication were removed from the EUROPEP-I. Most subscales are skewed positively. Normalized mean scores are similar across subscales except for IPC-II Patient-Centred Decision-Making and IPC-II Hurried Communication. All subscales load reasonably well on a single factor, presumed to be interpersonal communication. The best model has three underlying factors corresponding to eliciting (eigenvalue = 26.56), explaining (eigenvalue = 2.45) and decision-making (eigenvalue = 1.34). Both the PCAS Communication and the EUROPEP-I Clinical Behaviour subscales capture all three dimensions. Individual subscales within IPC-II measure each sub-dimension. Conclusion: The operational definition is well reflected in the available measures, although shared decision-making is poorly represented. These subscales can be used with confidence in the Canadian context to measure this crucial aspect of patient-centred care.

Langue d'origineEnglish
Pages (de-à)108-123
Nombre de pages16
JournalHealthcare Policy
Volume7
Numéro de publicationSPEC. ISSUE
DOI
Statut de publicationPublished - déc. 2011

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Empreinte numérique

Plonger dans les sujets de recherche 'Interpersonal communication from the patient perspective: Comparison of primary healthcare evaluation instruments'. Ensemble, ils forment une empreinte numérique unique.

Citer