Validation of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool in Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Integrated care is essential for improving the management and health outcomes for people with Parkinson's disease (PD); reliable and objective measures of care integration are few. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the psychometric properties of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool (RMIC-MT, provider version) for healthcare professionals involved in PD care. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered online to an international network representing 95 neurology centers across 41 countries and 588 healthcare providers. Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis extraction method was used to assess construct validity. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate model fit of the RMIC-MT provider version. Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the internal consistency reliability. RESULTS: Overall, 371 care providers (62% response rate) participated in this study. No item had psychometric sensitivity problems. Nine factors (professional coordination, cultural competence, triple aims outcome, system coordination, clinical coordination, technical competence, community-centeredness, person-centeredness, and organizational coordination) with 42 items were determined by exploratory factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.76 (clinical coordination) to 0.94 (system coordination) and showed significant correlation among all items in the scale (>0.4), indicating good internal consistency reliability. The confirmatory factor analysis model passed most goodness-of-fit tests, thereby confirming the factor structure of nine categories with a total of 40 items. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence for the construct validity and other psychometric properties of the provider version of the RMIC-MT to measure integrated care in PD. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Integrated Care in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life in Parkinson's disease (PD) is affected by motor and nonmotor symptoms, necessitating an integrated care approach. Existing care models vary considerably in numerous domains. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of PD integrated care models and develop recommendations for a representative model. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of published integrated care models and a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials examining integrated care versus standard care. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life using a validated PD scale. We evaluated levels of care integration using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. RESULTS: Forty-eight publications were identified, including 8 randomized, controlled trials with health-related quality of life data (n = 1,149 total PD patients). Qualitative evaluation of individual care model integration guided by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care revealed frequent clinical and professional integration, but infrequent organizational and population-based integration elements. Meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials revealed significant heterogeneity (I2 = 90%, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis including only outpatient care models (n = 5) indicated homogeneity of effects (I2 = 0%, P = 0.52) and improved health-related quality of life favoring integrated care, with a small effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.17; 95% CI, -0.31 to -0.03; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient integrated PD care models may improve patient-reported health-related quality of life compared with standard care; however, because of variable methodological approaches and a high risk of bias related to inherent difficulties in study design (eg, blinding of participants and interventionists), generalizability of these results are difficult to establish. The Rainbow Model of Integrated Care is a promising method of evaluating elements and levels of integration from individual patient care to population health in a PD context. © 2020 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Interprofessional education increases knowledge, promotes team building, and changes practice in the care of Parkinson's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Examine outcomes for the National Parkinson Foundation (NPF) Allied Team Training for Parkinson (ATTP), an interprofessional education (IPE) program in Parkinson's disease (PD) and team-based care for medicine, nursing, occupational, physical and music therapies, physician assistant, social work and speech-language pathology disciplines. BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals need education in evidence-based PD practices and working effectively in teams. Few evidence-based models of IPE in PD exist. METHODS: Knowledge about PD, team-based care, the role of other disciplines and attitudes towards healthcare teams were measured before and after a protocol-driven training program. Knowledge, attitudes and practice changes were again measured at 6-month post-training. Trainee results were compared to results of controls. RESULTS: Twenty-six NPF-ATTP trainings were held across the U.S. (2003-2013). Compared to control participants (n = 100), trainees (n = 1468) showed statistically significant posttest improvement in all major outcomes, including self-perceived (p < 0.001) and objective knowledge (p < 0.001), Understanding Role of Other Disciplines (p < 0.001), Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams Scale (p < 0.001), and the Attitudes Toward Value of Teams (p < 0.001) subscale. Despite some decline, significant improvements were largely sustained at six-month post-training. Qualitative analyses confirmed post-training practice changes. CONCLUSIONS: The NPF-ATTP model IPE program showed sustained positive gains in knowledge of PD, team strategies and role of other disciplines, team attitudes, and important practice improvements. Further research should examine longer-term outcomes, objectively measure practice changes and mediators, and determine impact on patient outcomes.