BACKGROUND: Primary health care reform is underpinned by a move towards patient-centred holistic care. This pilot study uses the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) to assess outcome at a fundamental level: that of the patient and their doctor at consultation. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the evaluative potential of the PEI in relation to a reform programme in Poland by (i) comparing the outcomes of consultations (using the PEI) carried out by nine doctors (three diploma GPs who had participated in the training programme, three GPs who had not participated in the training programme and three polyclinic internists); and (ii) relating PEI scores to a proxy quality process measure (consultation length). METHODS: A cross-sectional quantitative questionnaire survey was carried out using the PEI. The subjects were patients consulting with nine doctors distributed within a single region around Gdansk. RESULTS: The overall results with the PEI and consultation length reflected UK experience. In addition, there were significant differences between groups in this pilot study. Patients seen by diploma GPs achieved higher patient enablement scores (mean 4.33, 95% confidence interval 4.09-4.58) relative to GPs (mean 3.44, 3.21-3.67) and polyclinic doctors (mean 3.23, 2.99-3.47). However, there is evidence of appreciable between-doctor variation in PEI scores within groups. The difference in patient enablement between groups was not affected by patient case mix, in contrast to the duration of consultation, which was. Holistically trained diploma GPs spent longer with patients with psychological problems. Patients seen by diploma GPs received longer consultations (mean 12.65 min, 95% confidence interval 12.18-13.13) relative to their colleagues (the GPs' mean was 10.11, 9.82-10.41 min; that of the polyclinic internists was 10.16, 9.81-10.50 min). The duration of consultation was positively correlated with patient enablement. CONCLUSION: The results of such training courses should be examined from the perspective of both the patient and their doctor. Significant differences were found in both patient enablement and consultation length between patients attending groups of doctors delivering primary care, but working from different paradigms. This pilot shows promising results which, if repeated in a larger study, would provide an objective means of evaluating such reform programmes.
BACKGROUND: Primary health care reform is underpinned by a move towards patient-centred holistic care. This pilot study uses the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) to assess outcome at a fundamental level: that of the patient and their doctor at consultation. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the evaluative potential of the PEI in relation to a reform programme in Poland by (i) comparing the outcomes of consultations (using the PEI) carried out by nine doctors (three diploma GPs who had participated in the training programme, three GPs who had not participated in the training programme and three polyclinic internists); and (ii) relating PEI scores to a proxy quality process measure (consultation length). METHODS: A cross-sectional quantitative questionnaire survey was carried out using the PEI. The subjects were patients consulting with nine doctors distributed within a single region around Gdansk. RESULTS: The overall results with the PEI and consultation length reflected UK experience. In addition, there were significant differences between groups in this pilot study. Patients seen by diploma GPs achieved higher patient enablement scores (mean 4.33, 95% confidence interval 4.09-4.58) relative to GPs (mean 3.44, 3.21-3.67) and polyclinic doctors (mean 3.23, 2.99-3.47). However, there is evidence of appreciable between-doctor variation in PEI scores within groups. The difference in patient enablement between groups was not affected by patient case mix, in contrast to the duration of consultation, which was. Holistically trained diploma GPs spent longer with patients with psychological problems. Patients seen by diploma GPs received longer consultations (mean 12.65 min, 95% confidence interval 12.18-13.13) relative to their colleagues (the GPs' mean was 10.11, 9.82-10.41 min; that of the polyclinic internists was 10.16, 9.81-10.50 min). The duration of consultation was positively correlated with patient enablement. CONCLUSION: The results of such training courses should be examined from the perspective of both the patient and their doctor. Significant differences were found in both patient enablement and consultation length between patients attending groups of doctors delivering primary care, but working from different paradigms. This pilot shows promising results which, if repeated in a larger study, would provide an objective means of evaluating such reform programmes.
Authors: Cindy L K Lam; Esther Y T Yu; Yvonne Y C Lo; Carlos K H Wong; Stewart M Mercer; Daniel Y T Fong; Albert Lee; Tai Pong Lam; Gabriel M Leung Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2014-09-15