[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-407037-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-407037-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","enablement-after-consultation-in-primary-healthcare-how-do-patients-and-doctors-cross-sectionally-evaluate-it-in-northern-portugal","Enablement After Consultation in Primary Healthcare - How Do Patients and Doctors Cross-Sectionally Evaluate It in Northern Portugal","","Enablement After Consultation in Primary Healthcare examines how patients and general practitioners assess patient enablement following a family doctor visit in Northern Portugal. A cross-sectional observational design uses the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) with adults completing surveys after consultation. Results show patients report higher enablement than GPs, while patient–doctor agreement is poor and reliability across PEI items is low. The study concludes GPs underestimate perceived enablement and highlights the need to explore enabling factors and their effects on self-management and health outcomes.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/enablement-after-consultation-in-primary-healthcare-how-do-patients-and-doctors-cross-sectionally-evaluate-it-in-northern-portugal/407037/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/enablement-after-consultation-in-primary-healthcare-how-do-patients-and-doctors-cross-sectionally-evaluate-it-in-northern-portugal/407037.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"hdkawk","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the study’s primary objective?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To assess the level of agreement between patients and general practitioners in evaluating enablement following a consultation.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was enablement measured in the study?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Enablement was assessed using the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) questionnaire completed by both patients and GPs after consultations.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What did the study find about patient and doctor assessments of enablement?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Patients reported higher enablement levels than GPs, and the agreement between patients and GPs was poor, with low reliability of the total PEI score across items.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},407037,1790791036,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":107,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":112,"preview_page_count":4},3985747859855,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Patient Preference and Adherence  \nOpen Access Full Text Article ORIGINAL RESEARCH  \nEnablement After Consultation in Primary Healthcare: How Do Patients and Doctors Cross-Sectionally Evaluate It in Northern Portugal  \nIsabel Inês Loureiro 1*, Andreia Teixeira 2 , Mariana Fleming Torrinha 3 , Luiz Miguel Santiago 4–6 , *, Sofia Baptista 2 , 7 , 8 , *  \n1Family Health Unit Santa Clara, Health Centers Group of Póvoa de Varzim -Vila Do Conde, Porto, Portugal; 2Faculty of Medicine (MEDCIDS), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 3Family Health Unit Eça de Queirós, Health centers Group of Póvoa de Varzim-Vila do Conde, Porto, Portugal; 4Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal; 5Faculty of Medicine, University Clinic of General Practice and Family Medicine, Coimbra, Portugal; 6Centre for Health Studies and Research, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal; 7RISE-Health, Porto, Portugal; 8CUF Porto Hospital, Porto, Portugal  \n*These authors contributed equally to this work  \nCorrespondence: Isabel Inês Loureiro, Health Centers Group of Póvoa de Varzim - Vila do Conde, Rua Dr. António José de Sousa Pereira, S/N, 2° andar, Vila do Conde, Porto, 4480-807, Portugal, Tel + 351 964301088, Email [isaloureiro8@gmail.com](isaloureiro8@gmail.com)  \n\n| Introduction: The degree to which patients are able to understand, cope with, and manage their illness and daily lives can be assessed using the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) questionnaire, a tool widely recognized as the gold standard for such evaluations. The primary objective of this study was to assess the level of agreement between patients and General Practitioners (GPs) in evaluating enablement following a consultation.\u003Cbr>Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was carried out using the PEI in urban area,(3,88% of patients without GP) . Surveys were conducted with individuals over 18 years of age after their GP appointment. They were invited post-consultation to self-complete the PEI survey (range: 0–12) and sociodemographic questionnaire, following the written informed consent. Both patients and GPs completed the PEI. A minimum sample size of 108 participants was calculated, and a favourable opinion was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto (FMUP) .\u003Cbr>Results: The study included 16 physicians and 238 patients (65.1% women, median age 59) . Patients reported higher levels of enablement than GPs (median 8 vs 6), with a mean bias of 0.89. The agreement between the patients and the GPs was poor (42%– 46%), and the reliability of the total score across the six PEI items (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.126) was low.\u003Cbr>Conclusion: In this sample, GPs underestimated patients’ perceived enablement levels. Enablement is multidimensional and depends on various clinical interactions and care processes. Factors influencing enablement and its impact on disease self-management and health outcomes should be explored in future research.\u003Cbr>Keywords: enablement, primary care, doctors, patients, agreement |\n| --- |\n| Introduction\u003Cbr>Chronic diseases increasingly represent a sustainability challenge for health systems, requiring a shift from a diseasecentred to a patient-centred approach. This shift implies enhancing patient enablement and involving individuals more actively in the healthcare system in order to better address their needs.1,2\u003Cbr>Today, addressing health enablement is essential. It is a process that leads to greater understanding of one’s condition, determining better control over both the illness and the individual’s overall well-being.1 However, enablement is neither a simple nor necessarily linear process. Enablement depends on specific individual circumstances.\u003Cbr>In healthcare, consultations with the family doctor are fundamental to ensuring high-quality care.2 In 2011, patient enablement was added to the WONCA framework as one ofits 12 core pillars.3 At the heart of this enableme","cbCaituuoG7RcaDj","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaituuoG7RcaDj","pdf",1487515,12,"English","# Introduction\n## Patient enablement concept and rationale\n# Patients and Methods\n## Study design and participants\n## PEI survey and scoring\n# Results\n## Sample characteristics\n## Patient–GP agreement and reliability\n# Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"What was the study’s primary objective?\",\"answer\":\"To assess the level of agreement between patients and general practitioners in evaluating enablement following a consultation.\"},{\"question\":\"How was enablement measured in the study?\",\"answer\":\"Enablement was assessed using the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) questionnaire completed by both patients and GPs after consultations.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study find about patient and doctor assessments of enablement?\",\"answer\":\"Patients reported higher enablement levels than GPs, and the agreement between patients and GPs was poor, with low reliability of the total PEI score across items.\"}]","Enablement After Consultation in Primary Healthcare - How Do Patients and Doctors Cross-Sectionally Evaluate It in Northern Portugal | PDF",1790569670]