Chapter 5. Measure Maps and Profiles (continued, 16)

Measure #38f. PREPARED Survey — Modified Medical Practitioner Version

Care Coordination Measure Mapping Table

Legend:
■ = ≥ 3 corresponding measure items
□ = 1-2 corresponding measure items

PREPARED Survey — Modified Medical Practitioner Version

Purpose: To measure qualities of hospital discharge from the outpatient physician perspective.

Format/Data Source: 8-item questionnaire covering 2 key domains: (1) timeliness of communication and (2) adequacy of discharge plan/transmission.

Date: Measure published in 1998.¹

Perspective: Health Care Professional(s)

Measure Item Mapping:

• Communicate:
  • Across health care teams or settings: 7
• Information transfer:
  • Across health care teams or settings: 1-3, 5, 6
• Facilitate transitions:
  • Across settings: 4, 8
• Assess needs and goals: 4
• Create a proactive plan of care: 8
• Support self-management goals: 8
• Medication management: 6, 7

Development and Testing: Items were selected from the PREPARED Medical Practitioner survey. All items with nominal response categories that lacked graded or ordinal characteristics were excluded. Additionally, one item that had proven to have large proportions of missing responses because respondents checked “not applicable” in past studies was also excluded. Scale analysis was conducted on a total of 8 items after item reduction was completed. The 8-item scale proved to be internally consistent with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.86. Principal component analysis identified 2 components (timeliness of communication and adequacy of discharge plan/transmission). Construct validity of the measure was also verified.¹

Link to Outcomes or Health System Characteristics: None described in the sources identified.

Logic Model/Conceptual Framework: None described in the sources identified.

Past or Validated Applications:

• Setting: Acute care hospitals in Australia
• Population: Adult inpatients who were discharged to home
• Level of evaluation: Hospital

Notes:

• All instrument items are located in Table 2 of the source article.¹
• The PREPARED instrument is available in 6 versions: (1) Australian Patient Version, (2) Australian Carer Version, (3) Australian Residential Care Staff Version, (4) Australian Community Service Provider Version, (5) Australian Medical Practitioner Version, and (6) American Medical Practitioner Version. All of the Australian instruments can be found online.¹
• This instrument contains 8 items; all 8 were mapped.

Sources:

1. Graumlich JF, Grimmer-Somers K, Aldag JC. Discharge planning scale: Community physicians' perspective. J Hosp Med 2008;3(6):455-64.

Return to Contents

Measure #39. Health Tracking Household Survey

Care Coordination Measure Mapping Table

Legend:
■ = ≥ 3 corresponding measure items
□ = 1-2 corresponding measure items

Health Tracking Household Survey

Purpose: To assess whether continuity of care and referral source are associated with better coordination of care from the patient perspective.

Format/Data Source: 3-item telephone survey focusing on 3 major aspects of coordination: (1) whether the primary care physician is informed of care the patient received from an outside specialist, (2) whether the primary care physician discussed with the patient what happened at the most recent visit to the specialist, and (3) whether different doctors caring for a patient's chronic condition work well together to coordinate that care.

Date: Measure administered nationally in 2007.¹

Perspective: Patient/Family

Measure Item Mapping:

• Communicate:
  • Interpersonal communication:
    • Between health care professional(s) and patient/family: 2
  • Information transfer:
    • Across health care teams or settings : 1
• Monitor, follow up, and respond to change: 1,2
• Teamwork focused on coordination: 3

Development and Testing: Coordination measures were adapted from validated surveys and underwent cognitive interview testing to ensure that respondents understood and felt capable of answering the items.¹

Link to Outcomes or Health System Characteristics: Higher ratings of care coordination were associated with (1) continuity of visits with the same primary care physician and (2) primary care physician as the referral source.¹

Logic Model/Conceptual Framework: None described in the sources identified.

Past or Validated Applications:

• Setting: Primary and specialty care
• Population: Adult patients with a usual primary care physician and a visit to a physician specialist in the previous 12 months
• Level of evaluation: Health Care Professional(s)

Notes:

• All instrument items are located in Figure 1 of the source article.¹
• This instrument contains 3 items; all 3 were mapped.
• This instrument was developed by The Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). Information on the broader 2007 survey can be found online.²

Sources:

1. O'Malley AS, Cunningham PJ. Patient experiences with coordination of care: the benefit of continuity and primary care physician as referral source. J Gen Int Med 2008;24(2):170-77.
2. Health System Change (HSC) Web Site. Available at: http://www.hschange.org/CONTENT/1091/. Accessed: 20 September 2010.

Return to Contents

Measure #40. Adapted Picker Institute Cancer Survey

Care Coordination Measure Mapping Table

Legend:
■ = ≥ 3 corresponding measure items
□ = 1-2 corresponding measure items

Adapted Picker Institute Cancer Survey

Purpose: To assess patients' experiences with cancer care, health-related quality of life, comorbid illnesses, and sociodemographic characteristics.

Format/Data Source: 34-item telephone interview covering 7 different question domains: (1) coordination of care, (2) confidence in providers, (3) treatment information, (4) health information, (5) access to cancer care, (6) psychosocial care, and (7) symptom control.

Date: Measure published in 2005.¹

Perspective: Patient/Family

Measure Item Mapping:

• Establish accountability or negotiate responsibility: 1, 5
• Communicate:
  • Interpersonal communication:
    • Between health care professional(s) and patient/family: 9, 13
  • Information transfer:
    • Between health care professional(s) and patient/family: 1, 6, 7, 14-23
    • Across health care teams or settings: 2-4
• Facilitate transitions:
• • Across settings: 16, 24-26
• Assess needs and goals: 13, 15
• Create a proactive plan of care: 7, 28, 29
• Monitor, follow up, and respond to change: 3
• Support self-management goals: 23
• Teamwork focused on coordination: 8

Development and Testing: Questions were obtained from a survey designed by the Picker Institute and were adapted for a telephone interview. The instrument was pilot tested on a sample of 50 patients. Principal factor analysis was conducted to group questions into 6 different domains of care. All domains had moderate to high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.55 to 0.82).¹

Link to Outcomes or Health System Characteristics: Worse physical, functional, and disease-specific well-being as measured by the Trials Outcomes Index were found to be associated with higher adjusted problem scores for coordination of care, confidence in providers, and health information.¹

Logic Model/Conceptual Framework: None described in the sources identified.

Past or Validated Applications:

• Setting: United States
• Population: Adult colorectal cancer patients
• Level of evaluation: Health Care Professional(s)

Notes:

• The original measure did not have individual items numbered. In order to properly reference specific items within this profile, all instrument items found in the Appendix of the source article were consecutively numbered.¹
• This instrument contains 34 items; 25 were mapped.

Sources:

1. Ayanian JZ, Zaslavsky AM, Guadagnoli E, et al. Patients' perceptions of quality of care for colorectal cancer by race, ethnicity, and language. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(27):6576-86.

Return to Contents

Measure #41. Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey (ACES)

Care Coordination Measure Mapping Table

Legend:
■ = ≥ 3 corresponding measure items
□ = 1-2 corresponding measure items

Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey (ACES)

Purpose: To measure patient experiences with individual primary care physicians and their practices.

Format/Data Source: 34-item survey that covers two broad domains: (1) quality of physician-patient interactions and (2) organizational features of care.

Date: Measure developed in 2002.¹

Perspective: Patient/Family

Measure Item Mapping:

• Communicate:
  • Interpersonal communication:
    • Between health care professional(s) and patient/family: 6, 7, 10, 19
  • Information transfer:
    • Between health care professional(s) and patient/family: 9, 11, 15, 22
    • Across health care teams or settings: 21
    • Participants not specified: 12, 20, 26
• Assess needs and goals: 13, 14, 16
• Monitor, follow up, and respond to change: 22
• Support self-management goals: 11, 17

Development and Testing: ACES demonstrated high internal consistency reliability with a Cronbach's alpha >0.70. Physician-level reliability was also established with a sample size of 45 patients per physician.²

Link to Outcomes or Health System Characteristics: ACES has been used in several published studies that report its associations with important outcomes of care and organizational factors. A list of these publications may be found online.¹

Logic Model/Conceptual Framework: The Institute of Medicine definition of primary care was utilized as the measure's underlying conceptual model for measurement.²

Past or Validated Applications:

• Setting: Primary care practices in the United States
• Population: Adult patients from commercial health plans and Medicaid
• Level of evaluation: Health Care Professional(s); Practice

Notes:

• Instrument was provided by the authors upon request (A. Li, personal communication, September 9, 2010). The 2005 version was mapped for this profile.
• This instrument contains 34 items; 16 were mapped.
• The ACES survey is administered in Massachusetts every two years and annually in California as part of the California Cooperative Healthcare Reporting Initiative.

Sources:

1. Tufts Medical Center: Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies Web site. Available at: http://160.109.101.132/icrhps/resprog/thi/aces_publist.asp Accessed: 21 September 2010.
2. Safran DG, Karp M, Coltin K, et al. Measuring patients' experiences with individual primary care physicians. J Gen Int Med 2006;21(1):13-21.