Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care Cover

The Patient Experience of Integrated Care Scale: A Validation Study among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care

International Journal of Integrated Care
Volume 18 (2018): Issue 4
By: Heithem Joober,  Maud-Christine Chouinard,  Jenny King,  Mireille Lambert,  Émilie Hudon and  Catherine Hudon  
Open Access
|Oct 2018
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Table 1

PEICS.

  1. Have all your needs been assessed?

    • □ All of my needs have been assessed

    • □ Almost all my needs have been assessed

    • □ Some of my needs have been assessed

    • □ Few of my needs have been assessed

    • □ None of my needs have been assessed

  2. Were you as involved as you wanted to be in decisions about your care and support?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  3. Was your family or carer as involved in decisions about your care and support as you wanted them to be?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

    • □ There were no family or carers available to be involved

    • □ I don’t want or I don’t need my family or my carers to be involved

  4. Overall, do you feel that your carer/family received support from health and social services as needed?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

    • □ There were no family or carers to support

  5. Did health and social care staff tell you what will happen next?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  6. When health or social care staff planned care or treatment for you, did it happen?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  7. Were your care and support reviewed as they should be?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  8. Was your medication thoroughly reviewed as it should be?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  9. Did you know who to contact if you needed to ask questions about your condition or treatment?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  10. If you had questions, could you contact the people treating and caring for you?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  11. Did all the different people treating and caring for you work well together to give you the best possible care and support?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  12. Did health and social care services help you live the life you want?

    • □ Completely

    • □ A lot

    • □ Moderately

    • □ A little

    • □ Hardly

  13. Did health and social care staff give you information about other services that are available to someone in your circumstances, including support organisations’?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  14. Was information given to you at the right time?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  15. Was information provided in a way that you could understand?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  16. Could you meet/phone/email a professional when you needed to ask more questions or discuss the options?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

  17. If you still needed contact with previous services/professionals, would it be possible?

    • □ Always

    • □ Often

    • □ Sometimes

    • □ Rarely

    • □ Never

Figure 1

Flow of the patients throughout the study.

Table 2

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants (n = 159).

Age: mean (SD)58 (16)
Number of conditions – DBMA: mean (SD)4.1 (2.3)
Male: n (%)53 (33.3)
Education completed: n (%) 5 missing
     Less than high school36 (23.4)
     Completed high school45 (29.2)
     College41 (26.6)
     University32 (20.8)
Occupation: n (%) 6 missing
     Employed56 (36.6)
     Unemployed24 (15.7)
     Retired73 (47.7)
Annual family income: n (%) 6 missing
     Less than 20,000 CAD20 (13.1)
     20,000 to 49,999 CAD59 (38.5)
     50,000 CAD or more74 (48.4)
Marital status: n (%) 1 missing
     Married/living with a partner85 (53.8)
     Separated, divorced29 (18.3)
     Widowed21 (13.3)
     Single23 (14.6)

[i] SD: Standard deviation; CAD: Canadian dollar.

Table 3

Descriptive statistics and reliability of the PEICS.

Minimum scoreMaximum scoreMean (SD)Internal consistency: Cronbach alpha (95% CI)Test-retest reliability: ICC (95% CI)
06853 (10)0.88 (0.85–0.91)0.81 (0.64–0.90)

[i] SD: Standard deviation; ICC: Intra-class correlation; CI: Confidence interval.

Table 4

Concurrent validity between the PEICS and three subscales of the CC-MC.

CC-MC subscaleConcurrent validity: Spearman rank correlation coefficient
Coordination role (5 items)0.49*
Comprehensive knowledge of patient (4 items)0.54*
Team relational continuity (2 items)0.44*

[i] *p ≤ 0.01.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.4163 | Journal eISSN: 1568-4156
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Mar 21, 2018
Accepted on: Sep 25, 2018
Published on: Oct 12, 2018
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
Integrated Care,
Chronic Disease,
Primary Care,
Questionnaire,
Validation Studies

© 2018 Heithem Joober, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Jenny King, Mireille Lambert, Émilie Hudon, Catherine Hudon, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 18 (2018): Issue 4
Previous article
Next article