Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Patient perspectives on continuity of care: adaption and preliminary psychometric assessment of a Norwegian version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire (NCQ-N)

Authors: Øystein Hetlevik, Merethe Hustoft, Annemarie Uijen, Jörg Aßmus, Sturla Gjesdal

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Continuity of care is regarded as a core quality element in healthcare. Continuity can be related to one or more specific caregivers but also applies to collaboration within a team or across boundaries of healthcare. Measuring continuity is important to identify problems and evaluate quality improvement of interventions.
This study aimed to assess the feasibility and psychometric properties of a Norwegian version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire (NCQ).

Methods

The NCQ was developed in The Netherlands. It measures patients’ experienced continuity of care across multiple care settings and as a multidimensional concept regardless of morbidity. The NCQ comprises 28 items categorised into three subscales; two personal continuity scales, “care giver knows me” and “shows commitment”, asked regarding the patient’s general practitioner (GP) and the most important specialist; and one “team/cross boundary continuity” scale, asked regarding primary care, specialised care and cooperation between GP and specialist, with a total of seven factors. The NCQ was translated and adapted to Norwegian (NCQ-N) and distributed among patients referred to somatic rehabilitation (N = 984, response rate 34.5%). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), Cronbach’s alpha, intra-class correlation (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots were used to assess psychometric properties.

Results

All patients (N = 375) who had responded to all parts of the NCQ-N were included in CFA. The CFA fit indices (CFI 0.941, RMSEA 0.064 (95% CI 0.059–0.070), SRMR 0.041) support a seven-factor structure in the NCQ-N based on the three subscales of the original NCQ. Cronbach’s alpha showed internal consistency (0.84–0.97), and was highest for the team/cross-boundary subscales. The NCQ-N showed overall high reliability with ICC 0.84–91 for personal continuity factors and 0.67–0.91 for team factors, with the lowest score for team continuity within primary care.

Conclusions

Psychometric assessment of the NCQ-N supports that this instrument, based on the three subscales of the original Dutch NCQ, captures the concept of “continuity of care” among adult patients with a variety of longstanding medical conditions who use healthcare on a regular basis. However, its usefulness among varied patient groups, including younger people, patients with acute disorders and individuals with mental health problems, should be further evaluated.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
van Walraven C, Oake N, Jennings A, Forster AJ. The association between continuity of care and outcomes: a systematic and critical review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010;16(5):947–56.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Schers H, Webster S, van den Hoogen H, Avery A, Grol R, van den Bosch W. Continuity of care in general practice: a survey of patients’ views. Br J Gen Pract. 2002;52(479):459–62.PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Tarrant C, Dixon-Woods M, Colman AM, Stokes T. Continuity and trust in primary care: a qualitative study informed by game theory. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(5):440–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
5.
Gruneir A, Bronskill SE, Maxwell CJ, Bai YQ, Kone AJ, Thavorn K, Petrosyan Y, Calzavara A, Wodchis WP. The association between multimorbidity and hospitalization is modified by individual demographics and physician continuity of care: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):1–9.CrossRef
6.
Worrall G, Knight J. Continuity of care is good for elderly people with diabetes: retrospective cohort study of mortality and hospitalization. Can Fam Physician. 2011;57(1):e16–20.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Haggerty JL, Pineault R, Beaulieu MD, Brunelle Y, Gauthier J, Goulet F, Rodrigue J. Practice features associated with patient-reported accessibility, continuity, and coordination of primary health care. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6(2):116–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Uijen AA, Schers HJ, Schellevis FG, van den Bosch WJ. How unique is continuity of care? A review of continuity and related concepts. Fam Pract. 2012;29(3):264–71.CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
11.
Waibel S, Henao D, Aller M-B, Vargas I, Vázquez M-L. What do we know about patients’ perceptions of continuity of care? A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Int J Qual Health Care. 2012;24(1):39–48.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Freeman G, Hjortdahl P. What future for continuity of care in general practice? BMJ. 1997, 1870;314(7098)
13.
Baker R, Mainous Iii AG, Gray DP, Love MM. Exploration of the relationship between continuity, trust in regular doctors and patient satisfaction with consultations with family doctors. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2003;21(1):27–32.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Frederiksen HB, Kragstrup J, Dehlholm-Lambertsen B. Attachment in the doctor-patient relationship in general practice: a qualitative study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2010;28(3):185–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Wensing M, Hermsen J, Grol R, Szecsenyi J. Patient evaluations of accessibility and co-ordination in general practice in Europe. Health Expect. 2008;11(4):384–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
17.
Ministry of Health and Care Services: The coordination reform. Proper treatment – at the right place and right time. In: St.meld. nr. 47(2008–2009). Oslo; 2009.
18.
Berendsen AJ, de Jong GM, Meyboom-de Jong B, Dekker JH, Schuling J. Transition of care: experiences and preferences of patients across the primary/secondary interface - a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9(1):1–8.CrossRef
19.
Kripalani S, LeFevre F, Phillips CO, Williams MV, Basaviah P, Baker DW. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care. JAMA. 2007;297(8):831–41.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Jee SH, Cabana MD. Indices for continuity of care: a systematic review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63(2):158–88.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Saultz JW. Defining and measuring interpersonal continuity of care. The Ann Fam Med. 2003;1(3):134–43.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Uijen AA, Schers HJ, van Weel C. Continuity of care preferably measured from the patients’ perspective. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(9):998–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Bentler SE, Morgan RO, Virnig BA, Wolinsky FD. Do claims-based continuity of care measures reflect the patient perspective? Med Care Res Rev. 2014;71(2):156–73.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Uijen AA, Heinst CW, Schellevis FG, van den Bosch WJ, van de Laar FA, Terwee CB, Schers HJ. Measurement properties of questionnaires measuring continuity of care: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e42256.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Uijen AA, Schellevis FG, van den Bosch WJ, Mokkink HG, van Weel C, Schers HJ. Nijmegen continuity questionnaire: development and testing of a questionnaire that measures continuity of care. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1391–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Uijen AA, Schers HJ, Schellevis FG, Mokkink HG, van Weel C, van den Bosch WJ. Measuring continuity of care: psychometric properties of the Nijmegen continuity questionnaire. Br J Gen Pract. 2012;62(600):e949–57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186–91.CrossRef
28.
MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(2):130.CrossRef
29.
Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR. Structural equation Modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2008;6(1):53–60.
30.
Lt H, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55.CrossRef
31.
Wheaton B. Assessment of fit in Overidentified models with latent variables. Sociol Methods Res. 1987;16(1):118–54.CrossRef
32.
Schumacker RE, Lomax RG: A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling: psychology press; 2004.
33.
Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavior science. Lawrance Eribaum Association: Hillsdale, NY; 1987.
35.
Team; RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna; 2017.
36.
Rosseel Y: lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. 2012 2012, 48(2):36.
37.
Harzing A-W. Response styles in cross-national survey research: a 26-country study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. 2006;6(2):243–66.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Patient perspectives on continuity of care: adaption and preliminary psychometric assessment of a Norwegian version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire (NCQ-N)
Authors
Øystein Hetlevik
Merethe Hustoft
Annemarie Uijen
Jörg Aßmus
Sturla Gjesdal
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2706-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Health Services Research 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research article

Development and validation of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) induced angioedema investigator rating scale and proposed discharge criteria

Research article

Assessment of community health volunteers’ knowledge on cervical cancer in Kadibo Division, Kisumu County: a cross sectional survey

Research article

Effectiveness of trauma team on medical resource utilization and quality of care for patients with major trauma

Research article

Role stress among auxiliary nurses midwives in Gujarat, India

Research article

Examining the relationship between therapeutic self-care and adverse events for home care clients in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study

Research article

Collaboration in teams with nurse practitioners and general practitioners during out-of-hours and implications for patient care; a qualitative study