Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2005
Running nurse-led secondary prevention clinics for coronary heart disease in primary care: qualitative study of health professionals' perspectives.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Factors influencing the implementation of general practice nurse-delivered models of care for chronic conditions: a mixed-methods systematic review to inform models of care for chronic sleep disorders.BMC primary care · 2026Pooled it
- Process evaluations of primary care interventions addressing chronic disease: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Nurses' perspectives on nurse-coordinated prevention programmes in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a pilot survey.Contemporary nurse · 2015Trial
- Perspectives of older people engaging in nurse-led cardiovascular prevention programmes: a qualitative study in primary care in the Netherlands.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015Trial
- GP-led melanoma follow-up: views and feelings of patient recipients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2010Trial
- Healthcare professionals' perception of quality of care of patients with cardiac disease in Nigeria: Implication for clinical guideline, inter-professional education and team work.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2019Article
- How to become an expert educator: a qualitative study on the view of health professionals with experience in patient education.BMC medical education · 2015Article
- Article
- The contribution of qualitative research in designing a complex intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in two different healthcare systems.BMC health services research · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA randomised trial of nurse-led secondary prevention clinics for coronary heart disease resulted in improved secondary prevention and significantly lowered all-cause mortality at 4-year follow-up. This qualitative trial was conducted to explore the experience of health professionals that had been involved in running the clinics.
aimTo identify the barriers and facilitators to establishing secondary prevention clinics for coronary heart disease within primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Semi-structured audiotaped telephone interviews with GPs and nurses involved in running clinics.
settingA stratified, random sample of 19 urban, suburban, and rural general practices in north-east Scotland.
methodSemi-structured telephone interviews with 19 GPs and 17 practice-based nurses involved in running nurse-led clinics for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease.
resultsEight practices had run clinics continuously and 11 had stopped, with eight subsequently restarting. Participants accounted for these patterns by referring to advantages and disadvantages of the clinics in four areas: patient care, development of nursing skills, team working, and infrastructure. Most practitioners perceived benefits for patients from attending secondary prevention clinics, but some, from small rural practices, thought they were unnecessary. The extended role for nurses was welcomed, but was dependent on motivated staff, appropriate training and support. Clinics relied on, and could enhance, team working, however, some doctors were wary of delegating. With regard to infrastructure, staff shortages (especially nurses) and accommodation were as problematic as lack of funds.
conclusionsNurse-led secondary prevention clinics were viewed positively by most healthcare professionals that had been involved in running them, but barriers to their implementation had led most to stop running them at some point. Lack of space and staff shortages are likely to remain ongoing problems, but improvements in funding training and communication within practices could help clinics to be put into practice and sustained.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16004737PMC1472789What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.