ArticlePrimary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group2012
A qualitative study of stakeholder views of a community-based anticipatory care service for patients with COPD.
Article in Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A retrospective study of the impact of a telephone alert service (Healthy Outlook) on hospital admissions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2014Article
- Anticipating the outcomes and care choices for people living with COPD.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe need to consider anticipatory preventive care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been highlighted in UK guidelines and policy.
aimsTo explore stakeholder views of the utility and design of a community-based anticipatory care service (CBACS) for COPD.
methodsThis was a qualitative study using focus groups and in-depth interviews in North-East Scotland. Key stakeholders were purposively sampled: GPs (n=7), practice nurses (n=6), community nurses (n=4), district nurses (n=6), physiotherapists (n=6), pharmacists (n=8), COPD Managed Clinical Network members (n=8), NHS managers (n=4), the COPD Early Supported Discharge (ESD) Team (n=7), patients and carers (n=7). Data were analysed using framework analysis.
resultsA CBACS for COPD was broadly acceptable to most participants although not all wished direct involvement. Patient education and empowerment, clear roles, effective communication across traditional service boundaries, generic and clinical skills training, ongoing support and a holistic service were seen as crucial. Potential issues included: resources; anticipatory care being in conflict with the 'reactive' ethos of NHS care; and the breadth of clinical knowledge required.
conclusionA CBACS for COPD requires additional resources and professionals will need to adapt to a new model of service delivery for which they may not be ready.
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.