Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23286331›Full record

Trial reportTrials2013

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone triage of patients requesting same day consultations in general practice: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing nurse-led and GP-led management systems (ESTEEM).

John L Campbell, Nicky Britten, Colin Green, Tim A Holt, Valerie Lattimer, Suzanne H Richards, David A Richards, Chris Salisbury, Rod S Taylor, Emily Fletcher

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Telephone triage in-hours: does it work?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014
    Article
  6. Article
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

John L CampbellPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK. john.campbell@pms.ac.uk
Nicky Britten
Colin Green
Tim A Holt
Valerie Lattimer
Suzanne H Richards
David A Richards
Chris Salisbury
Rod S Taylor
Emily Fletcher
University of Exeter · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health 08/53/15Department of Health HTA/08/53/15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent years have seen an increase in primary care workload, especially following the introduction of a new General Medical Services contract in 2004. Telephone triage and telephone consultation with patients seeking health care represent initiatives aimed at improving access to care. Some evidence suggests that such approaches may be feasible but conclusions regarding GP workload, cost, and patients' experience of care, safety, and health status are equivocal. The ESTEEM trial aims to assess the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of nurse-led computer-supported telephone triage and GP-led telephone triage, compared to usual care, for patients requesting same-day consultations in general practice. METHODS/

designESTEEM is a pragmatic, multi-centre cluster randomised clinical trial with patients randomised at practice level to usual care, computer decision-supported nurse triage, or GP-led triage. Following triage of 350-550 patients per practice we anticipate estimating and comparing total primary care workload (volume and time), the economic cost to the NHS, and patient experience of care, safety, and health status in the 4-week period following the index same-day consultation request across the three trial conditions.We will recruit all patients seeking a non-emergency same-day appointment in primary care. Patients aged 12.0-15.9 years and temporary residents will be excluded from the study.The primary outcome is the number of healthcare contacts taking place in the 4-week period following (and including) the index same-day consultation request. A range of secondary outcomes will be examined including patient flow, primary care NHS resource use, patients' experience of care, safety, and health status.The estimated sample size required is 3,751 patients (11,253 total) in each of the three trial conditions, to detect a mean difference of 0.36 consultations per patient in the four week follow-up period between either intervention group and usual care 90% power, 5% alpha, and an estimated intracluster correlation coefficient ICC of 0.05. The primary analysis will be based on the intention-to-treat principle and take the form of a random effects regression analysis taking account of the hierarchical nature of the study design. Statistical models will allow for adjustment for practice level minimisation variables and patient-level baseline covariates shown to differ at baseline.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISCRTN20687662.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsGeneral PractitionersNursesReferral and ConsultationTelephoneTriageAdolescentChildCost-Benefit AnalysisGeneral PracticeHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareSample Size

Identifiers

PMID23286331
PMCPMC3574027
OpenAlexW2133132853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.