Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McGUINESS, C.
Right arrow Articles by SIBTHORPE, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McGUINESS, C.
Right arrow Articles by SIBTHORPE, B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 15:309-318 (2003)
© 2003 International Society for Quality in Health Care


Paper

Development and initial validation of a measure of coordination of health care

CLARE McGUINESS and BEVERLY SIBTHORPE

National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 0200, Australia

Objective. To describe the development and initial validation of the self-administered Client Perceptions of Coordination Questionnaire.

Design. The instrument was developed between 1996 and 1997 through iterative item generation; within a framework of six domains of coordination, addressed across four sectors of health care provision.

Setting. 1193 individuals with complex and chronic health care needs as judged by their general practitioners (GPs), who were participants in a 2-year randomized controlled trial of a coordinated care intervention in Australia. Other samples were collected in one general practice (98) and from attendees of a chronic pain management course (29).

Main measures. Face and content validity, completion rates, transferability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the 32-item instrument.

Results. Most items achieved excellent completion and comprehension rates. The instrument was transferable to another chronically unwell population. Cronbach's alpha of the entire instrument was 0.92, and for six individual scales scores ranged from 0.31 to 0.86. The six scales based on principal components analysis were acceptability, received care, GP, nominated provider, client comprehension, and client capacity. The first four scales were satisfactory, but the client scales were inadequate with poor internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity. People with chronic pain syndromes had significantly worse experiences for almost all items, supporting construct validity.

Conclusion. This instrument is one of the first to attempt to measure coordination of health care. Its strengths include ease of completion, transferability, and promising psychometric properties and construct validity. Problems capturing data about the patient's contribution to coordination highlight a lack of theoretical development in this area. A valid measure of coordination should be useful in needs assessment, program evaluation, and individual provider/practice audit, and would contribute to research into the experience and measurement of patient-focused care.

Keywords: coordinated care, health services research, patient evaluation of care


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Board Fam MedHome page
R. F. Van Vorst, R. Araya-Guerra, M. Felzien, D. Fernald, N. Elder, C. Duclos, and J. M. Westfall
Rural Community Members' Perceptions of Harm from Medical Mistakes: A High Plains Research Network (HPRN) Study
J Am Board Fam Med, March 1, 2007; 20(2): 135 - 143.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.