Health Complexity Assessment in Primary Care: a validity and feasibility study of the INTERMED tool

Author:

de Oliveira Camila AlmeidaORCID,Weber Bernardete,dos Santos Jair Lício FerreiraORCID,Zucoloto Miriane LucindoORCID,de Camargo Lisa LaredoORCID,Zanetti Ana Carolina GuidorizziORCID,Rzewuska MagdalenaORCID,de Azevedo-Marques João MazzonciniORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundWhile considerable attention has been devoted to patients’ health complexity epidemiology, comparatively less attention has been paid to tools to identify and describe, in a personalized and comprehensive way, “complex patients” in primary health care (PHC).ObjectiveTo evaluate INTERMED tool’s validity and feasibility to assess health complexity in PHC.DesignCross-sectional psychometric study.SettingThree Brazilian PHC Units.Participants230 patients above 18 years of both sexes.MeasurementsSpearman’s rho assessed concurrent validity between the whole INTERMED and their four domains (biological, psychological, social, health system) with other well-validated instruments. Pearson’s X2 measured associations of the sum of INTERMED “current state” items with use of PHC, other health services and medications. Cronbach’s Alpha assessed internal consistency. INTERMED acceptability was measured through patients’ views on questions and answers’ understanding and application length as well as objective application length. Applicability was measured through patients’ views on its relevance to describe health aspects essential to care and INTERMED’s items-related information already existing in patients’ health records.Results18.3% of the patients were “complex” (INTERMED’s 20/21 cut-off). Spearman’s correlations located between 0.44 - 0.65. Pearson’s coefficients found were X2 = 26.812 and X2 = 26.883 (both p = 0.020) and X2 = 28.270 (p = 0.013). Cronbach’s Alpha was 0.802. All patients’ views were very favorable. Median application time was 7 minutes and 90% of the INTERMED’s interviews took up to 14 minutes. Only the biological domain had all its items described in more than 50% of the health records.LimitationsWe utilized the cutoff point used in all previous studies, found in research performed in specialized health services.ConclusionWe found good feasibility (acceptability and applicability), and validity measures comparable to those found from specialized health services. Further investigations of INTERMED predictive validity and suitability for routine PHC use are worthwhile.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3