Systematic psychometric review of self-reported instruments to assess patient safety culture in primary care.

AIMS: To give an overview of empirical studies using self-reported instruments to assess patient safety culture in primary care and to synthesize psychometric properties of these instruments. BACKGROUND: A key condition for improving patient safety is creating a supportive safety culture to identify weaknesses and to develop improvement strategies so recurrence of incidents can be minimized. However, most tools to measure and strengthen safety culture have been developed and tested in hospitals. Nevertheless, primary care is facing greater risks and a greater likelihood of causing unintentional harm to patients. DESIGN: A systematic literature review of research evidence and psychometric properties of self-reported instruments to assess patient safety culture in primary care. DATA SOURCES: Three databases until November 2016. REVIEW METHODS: The review was carried out according to the protocol for systematic reviews of measurement properties recommended by the COSMIN panel and the PRISMA reporting guidelines. RESULTS: In total, 1.229 records were retrieved from multiple database searches (Medline = 865, Web of Science = 362 and Embase = 2). Resulting from an in-depth literature search, 14 published studies were identified, mostly originated from Western high-income countries. As these studies come with great diversity in tools used and outcomes reported, comparability of the results is compromised. Based on the psychometric review, the SCOPE-Primary Care survey was chosen as the most appropriate instrument to measure patient safety culture in primary care as the instrument had excellent internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.70-0.90 and item factor loadings ranging from 0.40-0.96, indicating a good structural validity. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present review suggest that the SCOPE-Primary Care survey is the most appropriate tool to assess patient safety culture in primary care. Further psychometric techniques are now essential to ensure that the instrument provides meaningful information regarding safety culture.

Seen through the patients' eyes: quality of chronic illness care.

Background: Most well-developed healthcare systems are facing the challenge of managing the increasing prevalence of patients with chronic diseases. Comprehensive frameworks, such as the chronic care model (CCM), receive widespread acceptance for improving care processes, clinical outcomes and costs. Objective: The purpose of this study was to explore chronic patients' perceptions of the quality of chronic care and the alignment with the CCM. Since previous research indicated that a patient's assessment may depend on socio-demographic or disease-related characteristics, the relationship between the mean Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) score and possible aforementioned predictors was also explored. Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study design was applied, and participants were recruited from the Flemish Patients' Platform (Belgium). An online questionnaire was designed to assess chronic patients' socio-demographic characteristics, medical consumption, quality of life (EuroQol-5D survey) and the perspective of chronic illness care PACIC survey. Results: The mean overall PACIC score was 2.87 on a maximum score of 5. The highest mean score for the PACIC subscales was found for 'patient activation' (3.26), followed by 'delivery system design/decision support' (3.23), 'problem solving/contextual counselling' (2.86), 'goal setting/tailoring' (2.70) and 'follow-up/coordination' (2.59). Quality of life, as measured by the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, had a significantly positive correlation with the mean PACIC score (P = 0.005). Conclusion: The CCM is considered an important step towards improved care for patients with chronic diseases. However, the findings of this study showed that elements from the CCM have not yet been fully implemented. Aspects such as dealing with problems which interfered with achieving predefined goals, helping patients to set specific goals for their care delivery and arranging follow-ups are less common in today's care of chronic diseases.

Economic Impact of Integrated Care Models for Patients with Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the costs and potential financial benefits of integrated care models for patients with chronic diseases, that is, type 2 diabetes mellitus, schizophrenia, and multiple sclerosis, respectively. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that conducted a cost analysis, considered at least two components of the chronic care model, and compared integrated care with standard care were included. RESULTS: Out of 575 articles, 26 were included. Most studies examined integrated care models for type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 18) and to a lesser extent for schizophrenia (n = 6) and multiple sclerosis (n = 2). Across the three disease groups, the incremental cost per patient per year ranged from - €3860 to + €613.91 (x¯ = - €533.61 ± €902.96). The incremental cost for type 2 diabetes mellitus ranged from - €1507.49 to + €299.20 (x¯ = - €518.22 ± + €604.75), for schizophrenia from - €3860 to + €613.91 (x¯ = - €677.21 ± + €1624.35), and for multiple sclerosis from - €822 to + €339.43 (x¯ = - €241.29 ± + €821.26). Most of the studies (22 of 26 [84.6%]) reported a positive economic impact of integrated care models: for type 2 diabetes mellitus (16 of 18 [88.9%]), schizophrenia (4 of 6 [66.7%]), and multiple sclerosis (1 of 2 [50%]). CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic literature review, predominantly positive economic impacts of integrated care models for patients with chronic diseases were found.