Primary Care Practice Assessment Tool: Enhancing Healthcare Quality and Accountability

Efforts dedicated to bolstering the accountability of healthcare service organizations are anticipated to intensify. As healthcare systems worldwide strive to optimize health outcomes—both through immediate curative and rehabilitative interventions and long-term preventative strategies—services failing to demonstrably contribute to these objectives will face increasing scrutiny. Consequently, the evaluation of healthcare structures and processes remains paramount. Given the growing body of evidence affirming the significant role of primary care in enhancing health outcomes, particularly in areas such as preventative care and chronic disease management (Starfield et al., 2005), the imperative to rigorously assess and ensure the quality of primary care service delivery becomes undeniable.

In response to this critical need, the Primary Care Assessment Tools (PCATs) have been meticulously developed. This comprehensive suite of instruments comprises:

• Consumer-client surveys designed to capture patient experiences and perspectives.
• Facility surveys aimed at evaluating the structural capacity of primary care settings.
• Provider surveys intended to assess provider perspectives and practices.
• Health system surveys (currently under development) to provide a macro-level assessment of primary care delivery within broader health systems.

While the accompanying manual for these tools is primarily tailored for researchers in research settings, offering detailed guidance on administration and data analysis, its foundational concepts and many sections remain highly relevant for broader applications. This includes evaluating and improving the quality of primary care delivery in diverse practice settings, even if certain research-specific sections are less pertinent for those focused on quality improvement initiatives.

Understanding the Core Concept of Primary Care

Primary care distinguishes itself through unique characteristics in health service delivery, shifting from a disease-centric to a person-focused approach. This fundamental principle allows for the equitable and effective provision of care to individuals and populations irrespective of their current health status. Primary care serves as the pivotal entry point to the broader healthcare ecosystem, acting as a crucial gateway to specialized secondary and tertiary care when needed. Therefore, experiences within primary care settings, particularly concerning its coordinating function, provide valuable insights into the overall effectiveness and patient journey through the entire healthcare system. Regular data collection through primary care assessments empowers healthcare organizations, including state entities and insurers, to ensure accountability for the services rendered to their enrolled populations.

Primary care is now widely acknowledged as the bedrock of effective and rational health systems. Its core components are well-defined and extensively documented in healthcare literature (Institute of Medicine, 1978; Starfield, 1998). The significant challenge lies in translating these broad, conceptual attributes into measurable characteristics. Key concepts underpinning primary care include first-contact accessibility, person-focused care over time (continuity), comprehensiveness of services, and care coordination. Furthermore, crucial related aspects encompass community orientation, family-centeredness, and cultural competence, all of which are integral to high-quality primary care delivery.

Leveraging this established theoretical framework of primary care attributes, the PCAT instruments are designed to systematically gather and analyze essential data. This data is crucial for comprehensively describing primary care services as both provided to and experienced by diverse populations, including children and adults. These assessments effectively reflect the organizational resources and operational processes within primary care settings. Importantly, these are elements that can be strategically modified to yield demonstrable positive impacts on healthcare delivery outcomes (Starfield et al., 1998).

The PCAT instruments are thoughtfully structured around the foundational principles of primary care. A deep understanding of these core concepts is essential to appreciate the purpose and significance of each question within the PCAT questionnaires. The following section offers a concise overview of the concept of primary care, specifically as it relates to the critical task of assessing the quality of primary care service delivery.

Primary care functions as a continuous and sustained source of person-centered healthcare over time. Effective primary care is deliberately planned and delivered, drawing upon a comprehensive understanding of the families, communities, and diverse cultures within the served population.

The delivery of primary care is characterized by a specific set of attributes and characteristics that define its essence (Starfield, 1979). The subsequent section provides a succinct description of each of the four primary attributes, alongside three interconnected and equally vital aspects:

• “First-contact” Care: This attribute emphasizes that primary care providers should be the initial point of contact for individuals seeking healthcare services for any new health concern or medical need. Except in cases of severe emergencies requiring immediate specialized care, the primary care provider acts as the standard entry point into the healthcare system. The provider then either directly addresses the health need or expertly guides the patient to the most appropriate and timely source of further care. For services to be genuinely considered “first-contact,” they must be readily accessible (a structural characteristic) and consistently utilized by the population whenever a new health need or problem arises (a behavioral characteristic).

• Continuous (Ongoing) Care: This refers to the sustained and longitudinal relationship between a patient and a regular source of healthcare over time. This relationship persists regardless of the individual’s current health status – whether they are experiencing illness, injury, or are in good health. The central aim is to establish a recognized medical or healthcare “home” for the patient, fostering a strong partnership between patient and provider. This ongoing care model is designed to cultivate a long-term, trusting relationship, facilitating mutual understanding of expectations and needs. Effective continuous care necessitates both the clear identification of a defined population for whom the service or provider assumes responsibility (often through a population registry) and the nurturing of an ongoing, person-focused (rather than solely disease-focused) relationship between healthcare providers and patients.

• Coordinated Care: This crucial attribute involves the seamless integration and linkage of various healthcare visits and services. The goal is to ensure that patients receive comprehensive and appropriate care for all their health concerns, encompassing both physical and mental health needs. The essence of care coordination is encapsulated by “the ready availability of information regarding prior and existing health problems and services, and the active consideration of this information in informing the approach to current care needs” (Starfield, 1998). Effective coordination minimizes fragmentation, duplication, and gaps in care, leading to a more streamlined and patient-centered healthcare experience.

• Comprehensive Care: Comprehensive primary care is characterized by the availability of a broad spectrum of services directly within the primary care setting. These services are appropriately delivered to address the vast majority of health needs encountered within the population. This comprehensiveness extends to all but the most exceptionally rare or highly specialized problems, ensuring that primary care providers can competently manage common and prevalent conditions (generally those occurring at a frequency of at least one to two thousand cases per year within their patient population). The scope of services includes, but is not limited to, proactive health promotion and disease prevention, personalized health coaching, counseling services when indicated, management of both acute and chronic illnesses and injuries, minor surgical procedures, injections, joint aspirations, simple dislocation treatments, common dermatological conditions, basic behavioral health and mental health support, and readily accessible information and referrals to community health resources.

Each of these four core domains of primary care is further defined by two critical subdomains: a structure-related subdomain (reflecting the inherent capacity of the system to deliver the necessary services) and a behavior-related subdomain (indicating the actual provision and utilization of these services when needed by the population). This framework results in a total of eight core subdomains that comprehensively characterize primary care. Importantly, all eight core subdomains are consistently applicable across diverse assessment instruments, including consumer-client surveys (for both adults and children), provider surveys, and facility assessments, ensuring a unified and standardized approach to evaluating primary care quality.

Beyond these four fundamental attributes, three additional aspects of care naturally emerge from the successful implementation of core primary care principles. These related aspects are frequently incorporated into comprehensive primary care assessments, further enriching the evaluation:

• Family-Centered Care: This approach recognizes the family as a central and integral participant in a patient’s healthcare journey, encompassing both assessment and treatment processes. It acknowledges that families possess both the right and the responsibility to actively engage, individually and collectively, in making informed decisions about the healthcare needs of their members and in actively participating in meeting those needs. Family-centered care is rooted in a deep understanding of the intricate nature, multifaceted role, and profound impact of family members’ health status (including illness, disability, or injury) on the entire family unit. It also considers the reciprocal influence of family structure, family function, family dynamics, and family health history on both the individual and collective health risks and health promotion opportunities for all family members.

• Community-Oriented Care: This dimension emphasizes the delivery of healthcare services within the broader context of the community it serves. The defining characteristic of community-oriented primary care (COPC) is its explicit focus on addressing the comprehensive healthcare needs of a defined population, rather than solely focusing on individual patients presenting for care. COPC extends its concern beyond the immediate patients and families seeking care to encompass the broader community, including individuals whose health needs may be unmet or underserved. It also critically examines the various community characteristics and social determinants of health that significantly influence the overall health needs of everyone within the community.

• Culturally Competent Care: Culturally competent care is defined as healthcare delivery that demonstrably honors and respects the diverse beliefs, interpersonal communication styles, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals as they relate to health and healthcare decisions. It goes beyond simple awareness of cultural differences to actively cultivate and apply specific skills that effectively translate this understanding into tangible actions and behaviors. The ultimate goal is to deliver care that is sensitive to cultural nuances and proactively works to preserve and promote health within diverse populations, recognizing that cultural factors profoundly shape health perceptions, practices, and outcomes.

The Evolution and Impact of Primary Care Assessment Tools

Evolving trends in healthcare service organization and delivery have spurred significant advancements in research and programmatic initiatives focused on primary healthcare. The development and refinement of the Primary Care Assessment Tools (PCATs) exemplify this progress, representing a direct outcome of sustained efforts to objectively measure the extent to which primary care principles are effectively implemented across various healthcare organizations and plans. This collaborative endeavor has been fostered through a strong partnership originating with the financial and administrative support from key stakeholders, including the U.S. Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB), numerous state and local MCH programs (spanning 1990-1996), the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the Child and Adolescent Health Policy Center (CAHPC), and the Primary Care Policy Center for the Underserved (funded by the Bureau of Primary Health Care) at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Historically, prior to the 1990s, defining primary care in measurable terms presented a significant challenge. Existing definitions often lacked the specificity required for objective assessment of the degree to which core primary care components were actually being attained in practice (Starfield, 1979; Starfield, 1998). However, the PCAT framework addressed this critical gap by focusing on assessing the structural and process elements of healthcare service systems. Structural elements encompass key organizational capacities such as accessibility of services, range of available services, clear definition of a patient population, and continuity of care mechanisms. Process elements focus on the actual delivery of care, including patterns of health service utilization and the effectiveness of health problem recognition and management. Crucially, all four primary domains of primary care – first-contact care, continuity (often termed longitudinality to emphasize care over time), comprehensiveness, and coordination of care – can be rigorously evaluated by examining these structural (“capacity”) and process (“actions” or “behavior”) elements within a healthcare system.

The Primary Care Assessment Tools are specifically designed to effectively measure the practical attainment of core primary care attributes. They achieve this by providing comprehensive data on both the structural and process elements directly linked to the four key domains of primary care. This includes gathering detailed information on the organizational focus of healthcare facilities, relevant patient characteristics, the specific services available on-site, and valuable perspectives from patients, providers, and facilities themselves regarding their experiences with care delivery and receipt. By systematically collecting and analyzing data across these dimensions, the PCAT instruments enable the derivation of subdomain scores (assessing both structure and process), domain-level scores, and an overall composite primary care score. This multi-level scoring system provides a nuanced and comprehensive picture of primary care quality within a given setting or system.

Between 1995 and 1996, a critical phase in the development and validation of the Primary Care Assessment Tools involved rigorous field testing. Child and adolescent versions of the Consumer-Client and Provider surveys were administered via telephone interviews to parents of 1,017 children and to health plans participating in Florida’s Healthy Kids subsidized insurance program (Hurtado, 1999). This initial phase of testing provided valuable insights into the instruments’ feasibility, clarity, and preliminary validity in a real-world healthcare context.

Further extensive testing and refinement of the PCAT instruments were documented in a significant study published in 1998. This research focused on evaluating the quality of primary care delivered to children across diverse healthcare settings within Washington, D.C. (Starfield et al., 1998). The Consumer-Client and Provider survey tools were administered through telephone interviews to a randomly selected sample of 450 consumers (parents in this case) and via mail to 101 of their healthcare providers. The study findings were highly encouraging, indicating that the PCAT tools effectively measured key primary care domains with both “reliability and a consistency that [suggested] validity.” Furthermore, the instruments demonstrated a robust ability to detect meaningful differences in primary care delivery across various types of provider organizations and healthcare facilities, highlighting their sensitivity and discriminatory power.

To ensure the broad applicability of the PCAT framework across different populations, an adaptation of the tools for adult populations was rigorously tested in a 1999 study conducted in South Carolina (Shi et al., 2001). This study employed a mixed-methods approach, utilizing both in-person and mail surveys with a sample of 890 individuals randomly selected from an HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) group and a low-income population group. The data collected through these adult-focused surveys were instrumental in conducting further in-depth statistical analyses to rigorously assess the validity, reliability, and overall instrument refinement of the PCAT tools for adult populations.

Since these initial validation studies, the PCAT tools have been applied and evaluated in a wide range of international settings, expanding their global reach and impact. Significant experience with the PCAT instruments has been accumulated in countries such as Canada (particularly in Quebec), Brazil, Spain (Catalonia), South Korea, and China (both in Taiwan and in the People’s Republic of China-PRC). This widespread adoption has led to the development of translated and culturally adapted versions of the PCAT tools, now available in Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, Mandarin Chinese (both PRC and Taiwan dialects), and Korean. This linguistic and cultural adaptation reflects the growing international recognition of the importance of primary care assessment and the global need for reliable and valid instruments to support quality improvement efforts. Several of these international evaluations have been published (refer to the PCAT research publications listed below), providing further evidence of the cross-cultural reliability and applicability of the PCAT instruments for assessing primary care quality in diverse healthcare systems and cultural contexts.

For those seeking more detailed information about the PCAT tools, including guidance on their administration and potential applications, please reach out to Dr. Leiyu Shi ([email protected]).

PCAT Research Publications

• Berra S, Audisio Y, Mantaras J, Nicora V, Mamondi V, Starfield B. [Adaptación del conjunto de instrumentos para la evaluación de la atención primaria de la salud PCAT al contexto argentino]. Argentine J Public Health 2011;2:6-14.
• Berra S, Rocha KB, Rodriguez-Sanz M, et al. Properties of a short questionnaire for assessing primary care experiences for children in a population survey. BMC Public Health 2011;11:285.
• Cassady CE, Starfield B, Hurtado MP, Berk RA, Nanda JP, Friedenberg LA. Measuring consumer experiences with primary care. Pediatrics (J Ambul Pediatr Assoc) 2000;105:998-1003.
• Clancy DE, Cope DW, Magruder KM, Huang P, Salter KH, Fields AW. Evaluating group visits in an uninsured or inadequately insured patient population with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2003;29:292-302.
• Clancy DE, Yeager DE, Huang P, Magruder KM. Further evaluating the acceptability of group visits in an uninsured or inadequately insured patient population with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2007;33:309-14.
• Figueiredo TM, Villa TC, Scatena LM, et al. Performance of primary healthcare services in tuberculosis control. Rev Saude Publica 2009;43:825-31.
• Haggerty JL, Pineault R, Beaulieu MD, et al. Practice features associated with patient-reported accessibility, continuity, and coordination of primary health care. Ann Fam Med 2008;6:116-23.
• Haggerty JL, Pineault R, Beaulieu MD, et al. Room for improvement: patients’ experiences of primary care in Quebec before major reforms. Can Fam Physician 2007;53:1057-2001:e.1,6,1056.
• Harzheim E, Duncan BB, Stein AT, et al. Quality and effectiveness of different approaches to primary care delivery in Brazil. BMC Health Serv Res 2006;6:156.
• Harzheim E, Starfield B, Rajmil L, Alvarez-Dardet C, Stein AT. Internal consistency and reliability of Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCATool-Brasil) for child health services. Cad Saude Publica 2006;22:1649-59.
• Lee JH, Choi YJ, Sung NJ, et al. Development of the Korean primary care assessment tool–measuring user experience: tests of data quality and measurement performance. Int J Qual Health Care 2009;21:103-11.
• Levesque, J, Haggerty, J, Beninguisse, G, et al. Mapping the coverage of attributes in validated instruments that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient perspective. BMC Family Practice 2012;13:20.
• Macinko J, Almeida C, de Sa PK. A rapid assessment methodology for the evaluation of primary care organization and performance in Brazil. Health Policy Plann 2007;22:167-77.
• Malouin R, Starfield B, Sepulveda M. Evaluating the tools used to assess the medical home. Manag Care 2009;18:44-8.
• Motta MC, Villa TC, Golub J, et al. Access to tuberculosis diagnosis in Itaborai City, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: the patient’s point of view. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2009;13:1137-41.
• Muldoon L, Dahrouge S, Hogg W, Geneau R, Russell G, Shortt M. Community orientation in primary care practices: Results from the Comparison of Models of Primary Health Care in Ontario Study. Can Fam Physician 2010;56:676-83.
• Pasarin MI, Berra S, Rajmil L, Solans M, Borrell C, Starfield B. A tool to evaluate primary health care from the population perspective. Aten Primaria 2007;39:395-401.
• Pongpirul K, Starfield B, Srivanichakorn S, Pannarunothai S. Policy characteristics facilitating primary health care in Thailand: A pilot study in transitional country. Int J Equity Health 2009;8:8.
• Rowan MS, Lawson B, MacLean C, Burge F. Upholding the principles of primary care in preceptors’ practices. Fam Med 2002;34:744-9.
• Russell G, Dahrouge S, Tuna M, Hogg W, Geneau R, Gebremichael G. Getting it all done. Organizational factors linked with comprehensive primary care. Fam Pract 2010;27:535-41.
• Shi L, Starfield B, Xu J. Validating the Adult Primary Care Assessment Tool. J Fam Pract 2001;50:161W-175W.
• Shi L, Starfield B, Xu J, Politzer R, Regan J. Primary care quality: community health center and health maintenance organization. South Med J 2003;96:787-95.
• Starfield B, Cassady C, Nanda J, Forrest CB, Berk R. Consumer experiences and provider perceptions of the quality of primary care: implications for managed care. J Fam Pract 1998;46:216-26.
• Stevens GD, Shi L. Racial and ethnic disparities in the quality of primary care for children. J Fam Pract 2002;51:573.
• Sung NJ, Suh SY, Lee DW, et al. Patient’s assessment of primary care of medical institutions in South Korea by structural type. Int J Qual Health Care 2010;22:493-9.
• Tourigny A, Aubin M, Haggerty J, et al. Patients’ perceptions of the quality of care after primary care reform: Family medicine groups in Quebec. Can Fam Physician 2010;56:e273-82.
• Tsai J, Shi L, Yu WL, Hung LM, Lebrun LA. Physician specialty and the quality of medical care experiences in the context of the Taiwan national health insurance system. J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:402-12.
• Tsai J, Shi L, Yu WL, Lebrun LA. Usual source of care and the quality of medical care experiences: a cross-sectional survey of patients from a Taiwanese community. Med Care 2010;48:628-34.
• [van Stralen CJ, Belisario SA, van Stralen TB, Lima AM, Massote AW, Oliveira CL. Perceptions of primary health care among users and health professionals: a comparison of units with and without family health care in Central-West Brazil]. Cad Saude Publica 2008;24 Suppl 1:S148-58.](/sites/default/files/2023-04/van-stralen-2008.pdf “van-stralen-2008”)
• Villalbi JR, Pasarin M, Montaner I, Cabezas C, Starfield B. [Evaluation of primary health care]. Aten Primaria 2003;31:382-5.
• Wong SY, Kung K, Griffiths SM, et al. Comparison of primary care experiences among adults in general outpatient clinics and private general practice clinics in Hong Kong. BMC Public Health 2010;10:397.

References

1. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q 2005;83:457-502.
2. Institute of Medicine. A Manpower Policy for Primary Health Care. IOM Publication 78-02. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1978.
3. Starfield B. Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
4. Starfield B, Cassady C, Nanda J, Forrest CB, Berk R. Consumer experiences and provider perceptions of the quality of primary care: implications for managed care. J Fam Pract 1998;46:216-26.
5. Starfield B. Measuring the attainment of primary care. J Med Educ 1979;54:361-9.
6. Hurtado MP. Factors associated with primary care quality for low-income children in HMOs: Florida’s Healthy Kids Program. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, 1999.
7. Shi L, Starfield B, Xu J. Validating the Adult Primary Care Assessment Tool. J Fam Pract 2001;50:161W,175W.

Request PCAT information