Affiliations 

  • 1 Centre for Clinical Trial, Institute for Clinical Research, Ampang Hospital, Ministry of Health, Jalan Mewah Utara, Pandan Mewah, 68000, Ampang, Selangor, Malaysia. yl.yilinlee@gmail.com
  • 2 Centre for Clinical Outcome Research, Institute for Clinical Research, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Health, Kompleks Institut Kesihatan Negara (NIH), No. 1, Jalan Setia Murni U13/52, Seksyen U13, Setia Alam, 40170, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
  • 3 Centre for Clinical Trial, Institute for Clinical Research, Ampang Hospital, Ministry of Health, Jalan Mewah Utara, Pandan Mewah, 68000, Ampang, Selangor, Malaysia
Trials, 2020 Jun 16;21(1):530.
PMID: 32546189 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04349-4

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There are few sources of published data on intra-cluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) amongst patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and/or hypertension in primary care, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. ICC values are necessary for determining the sample sizes of cluster randomized trials. Hence, we aim to report the ICC values for a range of measures from a cluster-based interventional study conducted in Malaysia.

METHOD: Baseline data from a large study entitled Evaluation of Enhanced Primary Health Care interventions in public health clinics (EnPHC-EVA: Facility) were used in this analysis. Data from 40 public primary care clinics were collected through retrospective chart reviews and a patient exit survey. We calculated the ICCs for processes of care, clinical outcomes and patient experiences in patients with T2D and/or hypertension using the analysis of variance approach.

RESULTS: Patient experience had the highest ICC values compared to processes of care and clinical outcomes. The ICC values ranged from 0.01 to 0.48 for processes of care. Generally, the ICC values for processes of care for patients with hypertension only are higher than those for T2D patients, with or without hypertension. However, both groups of patients have similar ICCs for antihypertensive medications use. In addition, similar ICC values were observed for clinical outcomes, ranging from 0.01 to 0.09. For patient experience, the ICCs were between 0.03 (proportion of patients who are willing to recommend the clinic to their friends and family) and 0.25 (for Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care item 9, Given a copy of my treatment plan).

CONCLUSION: The reported ICCs and their respective 95% confidence intervals for T2D and hypertension will be useful for estimating sample sizes and improving efficiency of cluster trials conducted in the primary care setting, particularly for low- and middle-income countries.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.