Risk strata and quality of care for the elderly in Primary Health Care
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2968.3166%20Keywords:
Electronic Health Records; Quality of Health Care; Health of the Elderly; Primary Health Care; Chronic Disease; Cross-Sectional StudiesAbstract
Objective
to identify patterns of associations between the degree of compliance to laboratory test requests by risk strata and the parameters of quality of care outcomes in primary health care (PHC).
Method
a cross-sectional study involving 108 elderly patients with hypertension and/or diabetes treated in PHC. A semi-structured questionnaire and electronic medical record data were used. To evaluate the quality of care, the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire was used. Descriptive analysis, multiple correspondence analysis and k-means grouping were performed.
Results
it was observed low compliance of the care practice, standing out as the worst parameter the evaluation of the diabetic foot (2.2%). Three clusters were identified, with cluster 1 having the highest number of individuals (37.0%), with better indicators of quality of care, evidenced by above 50% of compliance with laboratory tests (75.0%), high PACIC score (47.2%), control of blood pressure (70.0%) and metabolic levels (95.0%), and satisfaction with health (92.5%) and health access (90.0%). In contrast, cluster 3 (29.6%) was made up of individuals with worse outcomes of care.
Conclusion
low compliance of care practice and asymmetries among health actions and users’ needs were observed, indicating failures in the care process in PHC.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
