A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Patient assessment of diabetes care in a pay-for-performance program. | LitMetric

Objective: Few studies address quality of care in pay-for-performance (P4P) programs from the perspective of patients' perceptions. This study aimed to examine and compare the patient assessment of diabetes chronic care as perceived by diabetic patients enrolled and not enrolled in a P4P program from the patients' self-reported perspectives.

Design: A cross-sectional study with case and comparison group design.

Setting: A large-scale survey was conducted from February to November 2013 in 18 healthcare institutions in Taiwan.

Participants: A total of 1458 P4P (n = 1037) and non-P4P (n = 421) diabetic patients participated in this large survey. The Chinese version of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) instrument was used and patients' clinical outcome data (e.g. HbA1c, LDL) were collected.

Intervention: None.

Main Outcome Measures: Five subscales from the PACIC were measured, including patient activation, delivery system design/system support, goal setting/tailoring, problem solving/contextual and follow-up/coordination. Patient clinical outcomes were also measured. Multiple linear regression and logistic regression models were used and controlled for patient demographic and health institution characteristics statistically.

Results: After adjusting for covariates, P4P patients had higher overall scores on the PACIC and five subscales than non-P4P patients. P4P patients also had better clinical processes of care (e.g. HbA1c test) and intermediate outcomes.

Conclusions: Patients who participated in the program likely received better patient-centered care given the original Chronic Care Model. Better perceptions of diabetic care assessment also better clinical outcomes. The PACIC instrument can be used for the patient assessment of chronic care in a P4P program.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzv120DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

patient assessment
16
chronic care
12
care
9
assessment diabetes
8
care pay-for-performance
8
diabetic patients
8
p4p program
8
patients participated
8
assessment chronic
8
pacic instrument
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!