IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0263702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health complexity assessment in primary care: A validity and feasibility study of the INTERMED tool

Author

Listed:
  • Camila Almeida de Oliveira
  • Bernardete Weber
  • Jair Lício Ferreira dos Santos
  • Miriane Lucindo Zucoloto
  • Lisa Laredo de Camargo
  • Ana Carolina Guidorizzi Zanetti
  • Magdalena Rzewuska
  • João Mazzoncini de Azevedo-Marques

Abstract

Background: Health complexity includes biological, psychological, social, and health systems. Having complex health needs is associated with poorer clinical outcomes and higher healthcare costs. Care management for people with health complexity is increasingly recommended in primary health care (PHC). The INTERMED complexity assessment grid showed adequate psychometric properties in specialized settings. This study aimed to evaluate INTERMED’s validity and feasibility to assess health complexity in an adult PHC population. Method: The biopsychosocial health care needs of 230 consecutive adult patients from three Brazilian PHC services were assessed using the INTERMED interview. Participants with a total score >20 were classified as “complex”. Quality of life was measured using the World Health Organization Quality of Life BREF (WHOQOL-BREF); symptoms of anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); social support using the Medical Outcomes Study—Social Support Survey (MOS-SSS); comorbidity levels using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We developed two questionnaires to evaluate health services use, and patient perceived feasibility of INTERMED. Results: 42 participants (18.3%) were classified as “complex”. A moderate correlation was found between the total INTERMED score and the total scores of WHOQOL-BREF (rho = - 0.59) and HADS (rho = 0.56), and between the social domains of INTERMED and MOS-SSS (rho = -0.44). After adjustment, the use of PHC (β = 2.12, t = 2.10, p

Suggested Citation

  • Camila Almeida de Oliveira & Bernardete Weber & Jair Lício Ferreira dos Santos & Miriane Lucindo Zucoloto & Lisa Laredo de Camargo & Ana Carolina Guidorizzi Zanetti & Magdalena Rzewuska & João Mazzonc, 2022. "Health complexity assessment in primary care: A validity and feasibility study of the INTERMED tool," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0263702
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263702
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263702&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0263702?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hiromitsu Kaneko & Akiko Hanamoto & Sachiko Yamamoto-Kataoka & Yuki Kataoka & Takuya Aoki & Kokoro Shirai & Hiroyasu Iso, 2022. "Evaluation of Complexity Measurement Tools for Correlations with Health-Related Outcomes, Health Care Costs and Impacts on Healthcare Providers: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0263702. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.