测量以人为中心的综合护理生活在轻度至中度慢性肾脏疾病和多重疾病的人:一项横断面调查。

IF 2.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2025-09-18 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2025.1655472
Taylor Hecker, Sabrina Jassemi, Liza van Vliet, Nancy Verdin, Nazret Russon, Meghan J Elliott, Brenda R Hemmelgarn, Maria J Santana, Kimberly Manalili, Kerry McBrien, Aminu K Bello, Amity Quinn, Pim Valentijn, Maoliosa Donald
{"title":"测量以人为中心的综合护理生活在轻度至中度慢性肾脏疾病和多重疾病的人:一项横断面调查。","authors":"Taylor Hecker, Sabrina Jassemi, Liza van Vliet, Nancy Verdin, Nazret Russon, Meghan J Elliott, Brenda R Hemmelgarn, Maria J Santana, Kimberly Manalili, Kerry McBrien, Aminu K Bello, Amity Quinn, Pim Valentijn, Maoliosa Donald","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2025.1655472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Person-centered integrated care (PC-IC) has been shown to improve health outcomes for individuals with chronic conditions. However, there is limited evidence measuring PC-IC delivery to people with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and co-morbidities. We aimed to assess PC-IC delivery for this population in Alberta, Canada.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a survey (May-December 2023) using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool via weblink or telephone to quantify PC-IC using a 5-point Likert agreement scale. Patients with chronic kidney disease (non-dialysis, non-transplant) and co-morbidities, caregivers, and health care providers in Alberta were invited to participate. Participants were recruited through various methods, including in-clinic posters and web-based posts. We assessed responses using descriptive and non-parametric analyses (e.g., Mann-Whitney <i>U</i>-test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-seven eligible individuals completed the survey; 24 patients, 12 caregivers, and 61 health care providers. Caregivers rated PC-IC significantly lower than patients (overall score: 3.36/5 and 3.91/5, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.05) and health care providers rated PC-IC moderately (3.56/5). The lowest scored domain was care coordination amongst patients and caregivers (3.43/5 and 3/5, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.05) and regional health care laws/regulations amongst health care providers (2.94/5).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Survey respondents recognized that the overall delivery of PC-IC is not optimal and identified key areas to address including improving care coordination (e.g., communication between providers) and tackling regional health care laws/regulations (e.g., funding models). Our study highlights the need for further exploration regarding why PC-IC is perceived as suboptimal, particularly among subgroups, and how it can be improved.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"5 ","pages":"1655472"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12488591/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring person-centered integrated care for people living with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"Taylor Hecker, Sabrina Jassemi, Liza van Vliet, Nancy Verdin, Nazret Russon, Meghan J Elliott, Brenda R Hemmelgarn, Maria J Santana, Kimberly Manalili, Kerry McBrien, Aminu K Bello, Amity Quinn, Pim Valentijn, Maoliosa Donald\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frhs.2025.1655472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Person-centered integrated care (PC-IC) has been shown to improve health outcomes for individuals with chronic conditions. However, there is limited evidence measuring PC-IC delivery to people with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and co-morbidities. We aimed to assess PC-IC delivery for this population in Alberta, Canada.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a survey (May-December 2023) using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool via weblink or telephone to quantify PC-IC using a 5-point Likert agreement scale. Patients with chronic kidney disease (non-dialysis, non-transplant) and co-morbidities, caregivers, and health care providers in Alberta were invited to participate. Participants were recruited through various methods, including in-clinic posters and web-based posts. We assessed responses using descriptive and non-parametric analyses (e.g., Mann-Whitney <i>U</i>-test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-seven eligible individuals completed the survey; 24 patients, 12 caregivers, and 61 health care providers. Caregivers rated PC-IC significantly lower than patients (overall score: 3.36/5 and 3.91/5, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.05) and health care providers rated PC-IC moderately (3.56/5). The lowest scored domain was care coordination amongst patients and caregivers (3.43/5 and 3/5, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.05) and regional health care laws/regulations amongst health care providers (2.94/5).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Survey respondents recognized that the overall delivery of PC-IC is not optimal and identified key areas to address including improving care coordination (e.g., communication between providers) and tackling regional health care laws/regulations (e.g., funding models). Our study highlights the need for further exploration regarding why PC-IC is perceived as suboptimal, particularly among subgroups, and how it can be improved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"1655472\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12488591/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1655472\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1655472","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以人为中心的综合护理(PC-IC)已被证明可以改善慢性疾病患者的健康结果。然而,测量PC-IC对轻度至中度慢性肾脏疾病和合并症患者的递送的证据有限。我们的目的是评估PC-IC交付在阿尔伯塔省,加拿大这一人口。方法:我们进行了一项调查(2023年5月至12月),使用彩虹模型综合护理测量工具,通过网络或电话使用5点李克特协议量表量化PC-IC。邀请艾伯塔省患有慢性肾病(非透析、非移植)和合并症的患者、护理人员和卫生保健提供者参加。通过各种方法招募参与者,包括诊所海报和网络帖子。我们使用描述性和非参数分析(例如,Mann-Whitney u检验)评估反应。结果:97名符合条件的个人完成了调查;24名患者,12名护理人员和61名卫生保健提供者。护理人员对PC-IC的评分明显低于患者(总分分别为3.36/5和3.91/5)p。结论:调查受访者认识到PC-IC的整体交付并不理想,并确定了需要解决的关键领域,包括改善护理协调(例如,提供者之间的沟通)和解决区域卫生保健法律/法规(例如,资助模式)。我们的研究强调需要进一步探索为什么PC-IC被认为是次优的,特别是在子组中,以及如何改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Measuring person-centered integrated care for people living with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey.

Measuring person-centered integrated care for people living with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey.

Measuring person-centered integrated care for people living with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey.

Measuring person-centered integrated care for people living with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey.

Introduction: Person-centered integrated care (PC-IC) has been shown to improve health outcomes for individuals with chronic conditions. However, there is limited evidence measuring PC-IC delivery to people with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease and co-morbidities. We aimed to assess PC-IC delivery for this population in Alberta, Canada.

Methods: We conducted a survey (May-December 2023) using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool via weblink or telephone to quantify PC-IC using a 5-point Likert agreement scale. Patients with chronic kidney disease (non-dialysis, non-transplant) and co-morbidities, caregivers, and health care providers in Alberta were invited to participate. Participants were recruited through various methods, including in-clinic posters and web-based posts. We assessed responses using descriptive and non-parametric analyses (e.g., Mann-Whitney U-test).

Results: Ninety-seven eligible individuals completed the survey; 24 patients, 12 caregivers, and 61 health care providers. Caregivers rated PC-IC significantly lower than patients (overall score: 3.36/5 and 3.91/5, respectively, p < 0.05) and health care providers rated PC-IC moderately (3.56/5). The lowest scored domain was care coordination amongst patients and caregivers (3.43/5 and 3/5, respectively, p < 0.05) and regional health care laws/regulations amongst health care providers (2.94/5).

Conclusion: Survey respondents recognized that the overall delivery of PC-IC is not optimal and identified key areas to address including improving care coordination (e.g., communication between providers) and tackling regional health care laws/regulations (e.g., funding models). Our study highlights the need for further exploration regarding why PC-IC is perceived as suboptimal, particularly among subgroups, and how it can be improved.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信