PLoS ONE (Jan 2018)

A network perspective of engaging patients in specialist and chronic illness care: The 2014 International Health Policy Survey.

  • Yi-Sheng Chao,
  • Marco Scutari,
  • Tai-Shen Chen,
  • Chao-Jung Wu,
  • Madeleine Durand,
  • Antoine Boivin,
  • Hsing-Chien Wu,
  • Wei-Chih Chen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201355
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 8
p. e0201355

Abstract

Read online

BACKGROUND:Patient engagement helps to improve health outcomes and health care quality. However, the overall relationships among patient engagement measures and health outcomes remain unclear. This study aims to integrate expert knowledge and survey data for the identification of measures that have extensive associations with other variables and can be prioritized to engage patients. METHODS:We used the 2014 International Health Policy Survey (IHPS), which provided information on elder adults in 11 countries with details in patient characteristics, healthcare experiences, and patient-physician communication. Patient engagement or support was measured with eight variables including patients' treatment choices, involvement, and treatment priority setting. Three types of care were identified: primary, specialist and chronic illness care. Specialists were doctors specializing in one area of health care. Chronic illness included eight chronic conditions surveyed. Expert knowledge was used to assist variable selection. We used Bayesian network models consisting of nodes that represented variables of interest and arcs that represented their relationships. RESULTS:Among 25,530 participants, the mean age was 68.51 years and 57.40% were females. The distributions of age, sex, education, and patient engagement were significantly different across countries. For chronic illness care, written plans provided by professionals were linked to treatment feasibility and helpfulness. Whether professionals contacted patients was associated with the availability of professionals they could reach for chronic illness care. For specialist care, if specialists provided treatment choices, patients were more likely to be involved and discuss about what mattered to them. CONCLUSION:The strategies to engage patients may depend on the types of care, specialist or chronic illness care. For the study on the observational IHPS data, network modeling is useful to integrate expert knowledge. We suggest considering other theory-based patient engagement in major surveys, as well as engaging patients in their healthcare by providing written plans and actively communicating with patients for chronic illnesses, and encouraging specialists to discuss and provide treatment options.