27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Monitoring physical functioning as the sixth vital sign: evaluating patient and practice engagement in chronic illness care in a primary care setting--a quasi-experimental design

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In Canada, one in three adults or almost 9 million people report having a chronic condition. Over two thirds of total deaths result from cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer and respiratory illness and 77% of persons ≥65 years have at least one chronic condition. Persons with chronic disease are at risk for functional decline; as a result, there is an increased awareness of the significance of functional status as an important health outcome. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients who receive a multi-component rehabilitation intervention, including online monitoring of function with feedback and self-management workshops, showed less functional decline than case matched controls who did not receive this intervention. In addition, we wanted to determine whether capacity building initiatives within the Family Health Team promote a collaborative approach to Chronic Disease Management.

          Methods

          A population-based multi-component rehabilitation intervention delivered to persons with chronic illnesses (≥ 44 yrs) (n = 60) was compared to a group of age and sex matched controls (n = 60) with chronic illnesses receiving usual care within a primary healthcare setting. The population-based intervention consisted of four main components: (1) function-based individual assessment and action planning, (2) rehabilitation self-management workshops, (3) on-line self-assessment of function and (4) organizational capacity building. T-tests and chi-square tests were used for continuous and categorical variables respectively in baseline comparison between groups.

          Results

          Two MANOVA showed significant between group differences in patient reported physical functioning (Λ = 0.88, F = (2.86) = 5.97. p = 0.004) and for the physical performance measures collectively as the dependent variable (Λ = 0.80, F = (6.93) = 3.68. p = 0.0025). There were no within group differences for the capacity measures.

          Conclusion

          It is feasible to monitor physical functioning as a health outcome for persons with chronic illness in primary care. The timeline for this study was not sufficient to show an increase in the capacity within the team; however there were some differences in patient outcomes. The short timeline was likely not sufficient to build the capacity required to support this approach.

          Trial registration

          NCT00859638

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Predicting the probability for falls in community-dwelling older adults using the Timed Up & Go Test.

          This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) under single-task versus dual-task conditions for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falling. Fifteen older adults with no history of falls (mean age=78 years, SD=6, range=65-85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age=86.2 years, SD=6, range=76-95) participated. Time taken to complete the TUG under 3 conditions (TUG, TUG with a subtraction task [TUGcognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUGmanual]) was measured. A multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant function and logistic regression analyses were performed. The TUG was found to be a sensitive (sensitivity=87%) and specific (specificity=87%) measure for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falls. For both groups of older adults, simultaneous performance of an additional task increased the time taken to complete the TUG, with the greatest effect in the older adults with a history of falls. The TUG scores with or without an additional task (cognitive or manual) were equivalent with respect to identifying fallers and nonfallers. The results suggest that the TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying community-dwelling adults who are at risk for falls. The ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development and validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC).

            There is a need for a brief, validated patient self-report instrument to assess the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the Chronic Care Model-measuring care that is patient-centered, proactive, planned and includes collaborative goal setting; problem-solving and follow-up support. A total of 283 adults reporting one or more chronic illness from a large integrated health care delivery system were studied. Participants completed the 20-item Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) as well as measures of demographic factors, a patient activation scale, and subscales from a primary care assessment instrument so that we could evaluate measurement performance, construct, and concurrent validity of the PACIC. The PACIC consists of 5 scales and an overall summary score, each having good internal consistency for brief scales. As predicted, the PACIC was only slightly correlated with age and gender, and unrelated to education. Contrary to prediction, it was only slightly correlated (r = 0.13) with number of chronic conditions. The PACIC demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability (r = 0.58 during the course of 3 months) and was correlated moderately, as predicted (r = 0.32-0.60, median = 0.50, P < 0.001) to measures of primary care and patient activation. The PACIC appears to be a practical instrument that is reliable and has face, construct, and concurrent validity. The resulting questionnaire is in the public domain, and recommendations for its use in research and quality improvement are outlined.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Organizing care for patients with chronic illness.

              Usual medical care often fails to meet the needs of chronically ill patients, even in managed, integrated delivery systems. The medical literature suggests strategies to improve outcomes in these patients. Effective interventions tend to fall into one of five areas: the use of evidence-based, planned care; reorganization of practice systems and provider roles; improved patient self-management support; increased access to expertise; and greater availability of clinical information. The challenge is to organize these components into an integrated system of chronic illness care. Whether this can be done most efficiently and effectively in primary care practice rather than requiring specialized systems of care remains unanswered.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Fam Pract
                BMC Fam Pract
                BMC Family Practice
                BioMed Central
                1471-2296
                2012
                3 April 2012
                : 13
                : 29
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Rehabilitation Science, Faculty of Health Science, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, Room 403, 1400 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 1C7, Canada
                [2 ]Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, McMaster University, McMaster Innovation Park, 175 Longwood Road South, Suite 201A, Hamilton, ON L8P 0A1, Canada
                [3 ]McMaster Family Health Team, Stonechurch Family Health Centre (site), 1475 Upper Ottawa, Hamilton, ON L8W3J6, Canada
                [4 ]McMaster Family Health Team, McMaster (site), 690 Main Street West, Suite A, Hamilton, ON L8S 1A4, Canada
                Article
                1471-2296-13-29
                10.1186/1471-2296-13-29
                3355020
                22471378
                0927261e-7037-41e7-a11e-ed3c8b402432
                Copyright ©2012 Richardson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 7 July 2011
                : 3 April 2012
                Categories
                Research Article

                Medicine
                chronic disease,rehabilitation,primary care,physical functioning,self-monitoring,self-management

                Comments

                Comment on this article