ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2009
Primary care guidelines: Senior executives' views on changing health centre practices in hypertension treatment.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative study of two various models of organising diabetes follow-up in public primary health care - the model influences the use of services, their quality and costs.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- Gatekeeping and referrals to cardiologists: general practitioners' views on interactive communications.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2013Article
- Leadership in rural medicine: the organization on thin ice?Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2011Article
- Does the Cardiologist Have a Key Role in Long-Term Management of Hypertension?Cardiology research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the adoption of the national Hypertension Guideline in primary care and to evaluate the consistency of the views of the health centre senior executives on the guideline's impact on clinical practices in the treatment of hypertension in their health centres.
designA cross-sectional telephone survey.
settingAll municipal health centres in Finland. SUBJECTS: Health centres where both the head physician and the senior nursing officer responded.
main outcome measuresAgreement in views of the senior executives on the adoption of clinical practices as recommended in the Hypertension Guideline.
resultsData were available from 143 health centres in Finland (49%). The views of head physicians and senior nursing officers on the adoption of the Hypertension Guideline were not consistent. Head physicians more often than senior nursing officers (44% vs. 29%, p < 0.001) reported that no agreements on recording target blood pressure in patient records existed. A similar discrepancy was seen in recording cardiovascular risk (64% vs. 44%, p < 0.001). Senior executives agreed best on the calibration of sphygmomanometers and the provision of weight-control group counselling.
conclusionsHypertension Guideline recommendations that require joint agreements between professionals are less often adopted than simple, precise recommendations. More emphasis on effective multidisciplinary collaboration is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.