The work of having a chronic condition: development and psychometric evaluation of the distribution of co-care activities (DoCCA) scale
- PMID: 34016102
- PMCID: PMC8138998
- DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06455-8
The work of having a chronic condition: development and psychometric evaluation of the distribution of co-care activities (DoCCA) scale
Abstract
Background: Chronic care involves multiple activities that can be performed by individuals and healthcare staff as well as by other actors and artifacts, such as eHealth services. Thus, chronic care management can be viewed as a system where the individual interacts with people and eHealth services performing activities to maintain or improve health and functioning, called co-care. Yet, the system perspective is not reflected in concepts such as person-centered care and shared decision making. This limits the understanding of individuals' global experience of chronic care management and subsequently the ability to optimize chronic care. The aim of this study was threefold: (1) to propose a theory-based operationalization of co-care for chronic care management, (2) to develop a scale to measure co-care as a distributed system of activities, and (3) to evaluate the scale's psychometric properties. With the theory of distributed cognition as a theoretical underpinning, co-care was operationalized along three dimensions: experience of activities, needs support, and goal orientation.
Methods: Informed by the literature on patient experiences and work psychology, a scale denoted Distribution of Co-Care Activities (DoCCA) was developed with the three conceptualized dimensions, the activities dimension consisting of three sub-factors: demands, unnecessary tasks, and role clarity. It was tested with 113 primary care patients with chronic conditions in Sweden at two time points.
Results: A confirmatory factor analysis showed support for a second-order model with the three conceptualized dimensions, with activities further divided into the three sub-factors. Cronbach's alpha values indicated a good to excellent reliability of the subscales, and correlations across time points with panel data indicated satisfactory test-retest reliability. Convergent, concurrent and predictive validity of the scale were, overall, satisfactory.
Conclusions: The psychometric evaluation supports a model consisting of activities (demands, unnecessary tasks, and role clarity), needs support and goal orientation that can be reliably measured with the DoCCA scale. The scale provides a way to assess chronic care management as a system, considering the perspective of the individuals with the chronic condition and how they perceive the work that must be done, across situations, either by themselves or through healthcare, eHealth, or other means.
Keywords: Chronic care management; Copenhagen Psychosocial Quesionnaire (COPSOQ); Co‐production; Health and welfare technology; Human‐computer interaction; Patient engagement; Patient experience; Patient participation; Patient preference; Person‐centered care.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Figures
Similar articles
-
The work of Chinese chronic conditions: adaptation and validation of the Distribution of Co-Care Activities Scale.Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 17;11:1091573. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1091573. eCollection 2023. Front Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37139370 Free PMC article.
-
Better self-care through co-care? A latent profile analysis of primary care patients' experiences of e-health-supported chronic care management.Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 23;10:960383. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.960383. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36211687 Free PMC article.
-
Development and psychometric properties of a scale for measuring internal participation from a patient and health care professional perspective.BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Oct 1;13:374. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-374. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013. PMID: 24083632 Free PMC article.
-
Development and psychometric evaluation of the Attitudes Towards Recognising Early and Noticeable Deterioration (ATREND) scale.J Clin Nurs. 2023 Jun;32(11-12):2684-2699. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16350. Epub 2022 May 8. J Clin Nurs. 2023. PMID: 35527356 Review.
-
[Psychometric characteristics of questionnaires designed to assess the knowledge, perceptions and practices of health care professionals with regards to alcoholic patients].Encephale. 2004 Sep-Oct;30(5):437-46. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(04)95458-9. Encephale. 2004. PMID: 15627048 Review. French.
Cited by
-
The work of Chinese chronic conditions: adaptation and validation of the Distribution of Co-Care Activities Scale.Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 17;11:1091573. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1091573. eCollection 2023. Front Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37139370 Free PMC article.
-
Better self-care through co-care? A latent profile analysis of primary care patients' experiences of e-health-supported chronic care management.Front Public Health. 2022 Sep 23;10:960383. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.960383. eCollection 2022. Front Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36211687 Free PMC article.
-
Psychometric properties of the Bern illegitimate tasks scale using classical test and item response theories.Sci Rep. 2023 May 3;13(1):7211. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-34006-0. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37137932 Free PMC article.
-
Mind the gap: analysis of two pilot projects of a home telehealth service for persons with complex conditions in a Swedish hospital.BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 May 9;23(1):463. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09409-4. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023. PMID: 37161458 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Glasgow RE, Davis CL, Funnell MM, Beck A. Implementing Practical Interventions to Support Chronic Illness Self-Management. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2003;29(11):563–74. - PubMed
-
- Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract. 1998;1(1):2. - PubMed
-
- Beck J, Greenwood DA, Blanton L, Bollinger ST, Butcher MK, Condon JE, et al. 2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support. Diabetes Educ. 2017 Jul 28;43(5):449–64. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources