Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21504570›Full record

Trial reportBMC family practice2011

Efficacy of a strategy for implementing a guideline for the control of cardiovascular risk in a primary healthcare setting: the SIRVA2 study a controlled, blinded community intervention trial randomised by clusters.

Francisco Rodríguez-Salvanés, Blanca Novella, María Jesús Fernández Luque, Luis María Sánchez-Gómez, Lourdes Ruiz-Díaz, Rosa Sánchez-Alcalde, Belén Sierra-García, Soledad Mayayo, Marta Ruiz-López, Pilar Loeches and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC family practice, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01270022 (Development, Implementation and Evaluation of the Impact of a Guideline in Clinical Practise for Cardiovascular Risk.), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01270022 nacompletednot on this map

Development, Implementation and Evaluation of the Impact of a Guideline in Clinical Practise for Cardiovascular Risk.

TypeinterventionalSponsorGerencia De Atencion Primaria Area 2 De MadridRan2004 to 2010ConditionsCardiovascular Risk Factors, Clinical Practice Guideline, Implementation Strategies, Primary CareArmsImplementation, dissemination
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Francisco Rodríguez-SalvanésUnidad de Información Clínico Asistencial, Servicio de Admisión y Documentación Clínica, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa (HUP), Instituto de Investigación sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de La Princesa (IP), Red Temática de Investigación en Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (RECAVA), (C/Diego de León 62), Madrid, (28006), España.
Blanca Novella
María Jesús Fernández Luque
Luis María Sánchez-Gómez
Lourdes Ruiz-Díaz
Rosa Sánchez-Alcalde
Belén Sierra-García
Soledad Mayayo
Marta Ruiz-López
Pilar Loeches
Javier López-Gónzález
Amelia González-Gamarra
SIRVA2 group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThis work describes the methodology used to assess a strategy for implementing clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for cardiovascular risk control in a health area of Madrid.

backgroundThe results on clinical practice of introducing CPGs have been little studied in Spain. The strategy used to implement a CPG is known to influence its final use. Strategies based on the involvement of opinion leaders and that are easily executed appear to be among the most successful.

aimThe main aim of the present work was to compare the effectiveness of two strategies for implementing a CPG designed to reduce cardiovascular risk in the primary healthcare setting, measured in terms of improvements in the recording of calculated cardiovascular risk or specific risk factors in patients' medical records, the control of cardiovascular risk factors, and the incidence of cardiovascular events.

methodsThis study involved a controlled, blinded community intervention in which the 21 health centres of the Number 2 Health Area of Madrid were randomly assigned by clusters to be involved in either a proposed CPG implementation strategy to reduce cardiovascular risk, or the normal dissemination strategy. The study subjects were patients ≥ 45 years of age whose health cards showed them to belong to the studied health area. The main variable examined was the proportion of patients whose medical histories included the calculation of their cardiovascular risk or that explicitly mentioned the presence of variables necessary for its calculation. The sample size was calculated for a comparison of proportions with alpha = 0.05 and beta = 0.20, and assuming that the intervention would lead to a 15% increase in the measured variables. Corrections were made for the design effect, assigning a sample size to each cluster proportional to the size of the population served by the corresponding health centre, and assuming losses of 20%. This demanded a final sample size of 620 patients. Data were analysed using summary measures for each cluster, both in making estimates and for hypothesis testing. Analysis of the variables was made on an intention-to-treat basis.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01270022.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicCardiovascular DiseasesCluster AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesDouble-Blind MethodEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInformation DisseminationMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareResearch DesignRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID21504570
PMCPMC3103435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.