Patient preferences for patient participation: Psychometric evaluation of The 4Ps tool in patients with chronic heart or lung disorders

Luhr, K; Eldh, Ann Catrine; Nilsson, Ulrica; Holmefur, Marie

doi:10.1177/2057158517713156

Cited by 25 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the quality of care δ values, the items originating from the subscales respect and integrity and information and knowledge were considered as easier to satisfy and the items originating from the subscales planning and decision making and motivation and encouragement were considered as more difficult to satisfy (Table ). This could be considered, qualitatively and when comparing to other scales, as creating successful hierarchical rulers. Despite some minor misfits and significant item‐trait interaction chi‐square tests ( P < 0.001), the cumulated fit statistics showed that the PPRQ‐17 acceptably satisfies the RMT (Table ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, the content of PPRQ seems to corroborate a broader patient perspective; the understanding of staff; theories of PCC; and other similar questionnaires . However, recent Rasch validations of two other similar questionnaires, the Patient Preference for Patient Participation tool (The 4Ps) and Person‐Centered Care in outpatient care in rheumatology (PCCoc/rheum), suggest a unidimensionality for similar subcomponents as the PPRQ. Likewise, previous studies of the PPRQ using CTT revealed high correlations between the subscales, indicating a potential full scale for patient participation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Thus, the PPRQ was developed on the assumption that patient participation is a multidimensional concept, comprising five subscales: respect and integrity , planning and decision making , information and knowledge , motivation and encouragement , and involvement of family . Also, the content of PPRQ seems to corroborate a broader patient perspective; the understanding of staff; theories of PCC; and other similar questionnaires . However, recent Rasch validations of two other similar questionnaires, the Patient Preference for Patient Participation tool (The 4Ps) and Person‐Centered Care in outpatient care in rheumatology (PCCoc/rheum), suggest a unidimensionality for similar subcomponents as the PPRQ.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rasch analysis of the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ)

Melin

Fornazar

Spångfors

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ) according to Rasch measurement theory.Method: Five hundred twenty-two post-discharge patients from a neurological rehabilitation unit were included. The PPRQ questionnaire comprises 20 items rated by a cohort of 522 patients about their experiences of participating in rehabilitation.The measurement properties of the PPRQ were evaluated by Rasch analysis of the responses. Results:The Rasch analysis of 20 items showed some major misfits, particularly three items addressing the involvement of family members. After removing those items, the model fit improved and no significant DIF remained. Despite improvements, person values (−2.96 to 4.86 logits) were not fully matched by the item values (−0.61 to 0.77 logits). Neither did the t test for unidimensionality meet the criterion of 5%, and local dependency was present. The unidimensionality and local dependency could, however, be accommodated for by four testlets. Conclusion:The PPRQ-17 showed that a ruler with a reasonable and clinical hierarchy can be constructed, although the expectations of dimensionality and local dependency need to be evaluated further. Despite room for further development, PPRQ-17 nevertheless shows improved measurement precision in terms of patient leniency compared with previous evaluations with classical test theory. In turn, this can play a crucial role when comparing different rehabilitation programs and planning tailored care development activities.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rasch analysis of the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ)

Melin

Fornazar

Spångfors

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As suggested, these sections can serve as a basis for dialogues on and plans for health care interventions, in addition to follow‐ups, and/or for evaluation purposes. Considering that patients' preferences for participation may vary with, for example, age, gender, current situation and/or symptoms and their duration, and type of health care contact, the 4Ps has been suggested promising . Yet, its relevance has been primarily established for adults in contact with acute, long‐term, or primary care, but further studies are required to validate its appropriateness, for example, for people with cognitive deficits.…”

Section: Providing For Patient Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating patient participation by embracing patients' preferences—A discussion

Eldh

2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The 4Ps tool comprises four patient-related subscales: 1) Having a dialogue with healthcare staff, 2) sharing knowledge, 3) participating in planning, and 4) managing selfcare. Each subscale comprises three items [15]. The original version of these items was slightly rephrased and translated to Japanese to better t the study objective, and care was taken not to change the item meanings.…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting rural citizens to participate in healthcare activities and interprofessional collaboration: Effects of an intervention in Japanese communities

Ohta¹,

Ryu²,

Kitayuguchi³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To receive high-quality healthcare, citizens should actively participate in public healthcare programs and share decision-making with medical professionals, especially in rural areas; this requires support for citizens in the form of education. Few studies examine educational interventions’ effects on rural citizens’ motivation to participate in public healthcare efforts or interprofessional collaboration (IPC) perceptions. Thus, the current study investigates rural citizens’ participation and difficulties faced in healthcare efforts and educational intervention effects.Methods As a quasi-experimental, mixed-methods study, 277 (156=intervention group; 121=control group) rural Japanese participants were surveyed before and after a healthcare workshop, and scores were compared. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with 17 participants post-workshop. The contents of the interviewed were analyzed based on the framework of thematic analysis.Results Regarding pretest–posttest difference, intervention-group participants scored significantly higher regarding participating in planning and managing self-care than control-group participants (p=0.001 and p=0.014, respectively); there was no difference regarding having a dialogue with healthcare staff and sharing knowledge. Interviews revealed three themes: ability to manage health conditions, relationship with medical professionals, and relationship among citizens. Participants reported difficulties in judging symptoms and communicating with medical professionals. Hierarchy and citizens’ low motivation to participate in IPC hindered collaboration. Furthermore, community conditions, including weakening relationships, privacy issues, and social norms, affected healthcare behaviors. Conclusions Educational interventions emphasizing healthcare and IPC may positively impact rural citizens’ healthcare perceptions. However, citizens may experience difficulties changing their community conditions, enhancing limited healthcare knowledge/skills, and maintaining good relationships with medical professionals and other citizens. Both continuous educational information and interventions and dialogue among medical professionals and rural citizens should be promoted.

show abstract

Patient preferences for patient participation: Psychometric evaluation of The 4Ps tool in patients with chronic heart or lung disorders

Cited by 25 publications

References 25 publications

Rasch analysis of the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ)

Rasch analysis of the Patient Participation in Rehabilitation Questionnaire (PPRQ)

Facilitating patient participation by embracing patients' preferences—A discussion

Supporting rural citizens to participate in healthcare activities and interprofessional collaboration: Effects of an intervention in Japanese communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About