Advanced

Reliability and applicability of the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) in a Swedish general practice setting

Rööst, Mattias LU ; Zielinski, Andrzej LU ; Petersson, Christer and Strandberg, Eva-Lena LU (2015) In BMC Family Practice 16(1).
Abstract
Background: The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI), which has been used to evaluate core ingredients in primary care consultations, has been proposed as a means of moving beyond patient satisfaction evaluations. The aim of the present study was to examine the reliability and applicability of the PEI to the Swedish context. Methods: The original PEI was translated to Swedish and included in a questionnaire that was given to consecutively scheduled patients in four primary care settings. Respondents completed identical questionnaires immediately after a consultation, as well as two days and two weeks later. The analysis focused on internal reliability, test-retest reliability and internal construct validity. Results: Mean PEI scores... (More)
Background: The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI), which has been used to evaluate core ingredients in primary care consultations, has been proposed as a means of moving beyond patient satisfaction evaluations. The aim of the present study was to examine the reliability and applicability of the PEI to the Swedish context. Methods: The original PEI was translated to Swedish and included in a questionnaire that was given to consecutively scheduled patients in four primary care settings. Respondents completed identical questionnaires immediately after a consultation, as well as two days and two weeks later. The analysis focused on internal reliability, test-retest reliability and internal construct validity. Results: Mean PEI scores declined significantly between baseline (3.48, SD 3.21) and the first follow-up questionnaire (3.06, SD 3.37). All three questionnaires showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.85). Test-retest showed moderate agreement for all questions when comparing baseline and the first follow-up (kappa 0.54-0.65) and greater consistency between the two follow-up questionnaires (kappa 0.65-0.75). A large proportion of respondents characterized at least one of the questions as irrelevant (39%). Conclusions: The Swedish version of the PEI instrument has high internal consistency and moderate to good reliability. It can be used in research but is not recommended as a measure of quality of care. The instrument could benefit from further development and validity testing. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Consultation, Enabling factors, Patient-centred care, Primary care, Patient evaluation
in
BMC Family Practice
volume
16
issue
1
publisher
BioMed Central
external identifiers
  • wos:000350507400001
  • scopus:84924935769
  • pmid:25879632
ISSN
1471-2296
DOI
10.1186/s12875-015-0242-9
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
d0f4e7a5-3f0f-4d89-8e55-e93f145b2715 (old id 5300442)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879632?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2015-05-05 18:12:45
date last changed
2017-06-11 04:03:15
@article{d0f4e7a5-3f0f-4d89-8e55-e93f145b2715,
  abstract     = {Background: The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI), which has been used to evaluate core ingredients in primary care consultations, has been proposed as a means of moving beyond patient satisfaction evaluations. The aim of the present study was to examine the reliability and applicability of the PEI to the Swedish context. Methods: The original PEI was translated to Swedish and included in a questionnaire that was given to consecutively scheduled patients in four primary care settings. Respondents completed identical questionnaires immediately after a consultation, as well as two days and two weeks later. The analysis focused on internal reliability, test-retest reliability and internal construct validity. Results: Mean PEI scores declined significantly between baseline (3.48, SD 3.21) and the first follow-up questionnaire (3.06, SD 3.37). All three questionnaires showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.85). Test-retest showed moderate agreement for all questions when comparing baseline and the first follow-up (kappa 0.54-0.65) and greater consistency between the two follow-up questionnaires (kappa 0.65-0.75). A large proportion of respondents characterized at least one of the questions as irrelevant (39%). Conclusions: The Swedish version of the PEI instrument has high internal consistency and moderate to good reliability. It can be used in research but is not recommended as a measure of quality of care. The instrument could benefit from further development and validity testing.},
  articleno    = {31},
  author       = {Rööst, Mattias and Zielinski, Andrzej and Petersson, Christer and Strandberg, Eva-Lena},
  issn         = {1471-2296},
  keyword      = {Consultation,Enabling factors,Patient-centred care,Primary care,Patient evaluation},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  publisher    = {BioMed Central},
  series       = {BMC Family Practice},
  title        = {Reliability and applicability of the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) in a Swedish general practice setting},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0242-9},
  volume       = {16},
  year         = {2015},
}