# Patient Perspectives on Coordinated Care: Preliminary Results from the Implementation Stage Using Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs)

## TL;DR

This study explores how patients experience coordinated care before and after its implementation, using patient-reported experience measures.

## Contribution

The study introduces the use of the JOP-POP tool to evaluate patient experiences with coordinated care implementation.

## Key findings

- Patients showed significant improvement in care coordination after six months of coordinated care.
- The greatest improvement was in coordination of care, while the smallest was in patient approach.
- Health status assessment was significantly related to the number of chronic diseases before care.

## Abstract

Background and Objectives: Integrated health services are health services that are managed and delivered in a way that ensures patients receive a continuum of health promotion, disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment, disease management, rehabilitation, and palliative care services at different levels and sites of care within the health system, and according to their needs, throughout their life course. Assessing the effectiveness of their implementation, the perspective of the process participant—the patient—is examined. There are three main types of patient-reported measures: PROM, PREM and HLS. PREM (patient-reported experience measure) is a tool that allows the objective measurement of the patient’s experience related to healthcare services, for instance, the timeliness of visits or receiving recommendations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the coordinated care experienced by patients (PREMs) before and after the introduction of coordinated care, using the JOP-POP tool as a key measure. Materials and Methods: This longitudinal study was conducted in two stages. The first stage concerned the joining of the coordinated care program by the entity in which the study was conducted; the study was repeated six months after joining coordinated care (CC). At each stage of the study, the study group included 40 patients. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to verify the normality of the distribution of quantitative variables. For statistical analysis, the Wilcoxon test for paired samples was used to compare two ordinal dependent variables. For independent variables, the Mann–Whitney and the Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA by ranks tests were used, with a post hoc test of multiple comparisons of mean ranks. Results: A statistically significant relationship (p = 0.00157) was observed between the number of chronic diseases and health status assessment before inclusion in coordinated care. The patients’ responses showed statistically significant improvement 6 months after the introduction of coordinated care (CC). The improvement in assessment was related to the time physicians spent with patients. The greatest improvement over 6 months was achieved in coordination of care and the smallest improvement was noted in the approach to the patient. Conclusions: The JOP-POP tool may be useful in future studies to assess patients’ experiences with implementing coordinated care.