Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) of diabetes in the out-patient department of a private hospital

Background@#Patient-centered outcomes in chronic care assessed through Quality of Health Care can be measured by its congruence to the Chronic Care Model (CCM) using Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC). Behavioral and quality measures that influence the patient’s perception of the quality of care remain unknown.@*Objective@#This study aimed to assess the quality of chronic illness care among diabetic patients using PACIC and its relationship to socio-demographic factors.@*Methods@#A cross-sectional study involving diabetic patients of the Out-Patient Department of a private hospital were enrolled through non-probability sampling. Overall score from the PACIC questionnaire, its subscale scores and its relationship with the socio-demographic factors were determined using descriptive statistics.@*Results@#All participants were married and living with their families. Median age was 58. The over- all PACIC score was 3.53 + 0.72 SD. Problem solving/Contextual subscale presented the highest score while follow up/coordination had the least. Those who have college degrees had significantly lower mean scores than high school graduates (p-value = 0.032).@*Conclusion@#PACIC scores indicate a moderate to high quality of care. PACIC is a practical instrument that can be used in quality assessment and improvement programs.

Validity and reliability of the Patient Assessment on Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Malaysia: English version

@#Introduction: The Patient Assessment on Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) was developed to assess patients’ perspectives on the alignment of primary care to the chronic care model. The Malay PACIC has been validated; however, Malaysia is a multicultural society, and English is spoken by many Malaysians and expatriates. We sought to validate the English version of the PACIC among patients with diabetes mellitus in Malaysia, as Malaysians may interpret a questionnaire that was originally developed for Americans in a different way. Method: This study was conducted between November and December 2016 at two primary care clinics that offered integrated diabetes care at the time. These sites were selected to assess the discriminative validity of the PACIC. Site 1 is a Malaysian Ministry of Health-run primary care clinic while site 2 is a university-run hospital-based primary care clinic. Only site 1 annually monitors patient performance and encourages them to achieve their HbA1c targets using a standard checklist. Patients with diabetes mellitus who understood English were recruited. Participants were asked to fill out the PACIC at baseline and two weeks later. Results: A total of 200 out of the 212 invited agreed to participate (response rate=94.3%). Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the 5-factor structure of the PACIC. The overall PACIC score and the score in two of the five domains were significantly higher at site 1 than at site 2. The overall Cronbach’s alpha was 0.924. At test-retest, intra-class correlation coefficient values ranged from 0.641 to 0.882. Conclusion: The English version of the PACIC was found to be a valid and reliable instrument to assess the quality of care among patients with diabetes mellitus in Malaysia.