Structural validity and internal consistency of the Patient Centred Assessment Method in a primary care setting in a Japanese island area: a cross-sectional study

  • Yoshifumi Sugiyama
    Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Center for Medical Sciences, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan
  • Rieko Mutai
    Department of Adult Nursing, The Jikei University School of Nursing, Chofu, Tokyo, Japan
  • Hisashi Yoshimoto
    Department of Family Medicine, General Practice and Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
  • Ryoko Horiguchi
    Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Center for Medical Sciences, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan
  • Shuhei Yoshida
    Department of Community-Based Medical System, Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan
  • Masato Matsushima
    Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Center for Medical Sciences, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan

書誌事項

公開日
2022-06
資源種別
journal article
権利情報
  • http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
DOI
  • 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050566
公開者
BMJ

この論文をさがす

説明

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>The objective of this study was to examine the structural validity and internal consistency of the original English version of the Patient Centred Assessment Method (PCAM) in a primary care setting in a Japanese island area.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design</jats:title> <jats:p>Cross-sectional study.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Setting</jats:title> <jats:p>A clinic on a remote island in Okinawa, Japan, that provides general outpatient and 24-hour emergency services.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Participants</jats:title> <jats:p>This study included 355 patients who visited Tarama Clinic from 1 April 2018 to 30 June 2018, were aged ≥20 years, lived in Tarama Village and had decision-making capacity.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Main outcome measures</jats:title> <jats:p>Patient complexity scored by the PCAM.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>The mean (SD) PCAM score was 21.4 (5.7). The distribution was skewed to the right and there were no ceiling and floor effects. Confirmatory factor analysis found that the previously reported two-factor and three-factor structures did not show a good fit (root mean square error of approximation 0.18 and 0.16, comparative fit index 0.83 and 0.89 and standardised root mean square residual 0.14 and 0.11, respectively). Exploratory factor analysis revealed a new two-factor structure: ‘Biomedical complexity’ and ‘Psychosocial complexity’. The Cronbach’s alpha values for the total PCAM score, the ‘Biomedical complexity’ factor, and the ‘Psychosocial complexity’ factor were 0.81, 0.82 and 0.74, respectively.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>In this study, confirmatory factor analysis found that the data did not fit sufficiently using the previously reported two-factor and three-factor structures. Instead, exploratory factor analysis revealed a new two-factor structure, for which the Cronbach’s alpha values exceeded the threshold level. Therefore, the structural validity and internal consistency of the English version of the PCAM were verified in a primary care setting in a Japanese island area.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

収録刊行物

  • BMJ Open

    BMJ Open 12 (6), e050566-, 2022-06

    BMJ

被引用文献 (1)*注記

もっと見る

参考文献 (21)*注記

もっと見る

関連プロジェクト

もっと見る

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ