ArticleLondon journal of primary care2010
Inter-organisational communication for patients being case managed by community matrons.
Article in London journal of primary care, 2010. 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.
- Using routinely gathered data to evaluate locally led service improvements.London journal of primary care · 2011Article
- Making a jigsaw puzzle in 10 minutes: is case management feasible in general practice?London journal of primary care · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Poor communication between community matrons (CMs), in-hours and out-of-hours (OoH) general practitioners (GPs) causes uncertainty and inefficiencies. Setting A practice-based commissioning group in West London and the associated CMs who case manage high users of hospital services. Question What helps good communication between CMs, GPs and OoH services to ensure that the right patients are case managed and hospital admissions are avoided? Methods Whole system participatory action research, with four stages: 1) identify communication problems as perceived by a wide range of stakeholders; 2) draw a diagram of the existing communication system, and with stakeholders redraw this to overcome its weaknesses; 3) pilot the changes proposed; 4) gain consensus among stakeholders about policy. Results Stakeholders agreed that standards should be adopted to improve communication for the care of patients who are case managed by CMs. Routine passage of information between GP, CMs and the OoH services would achieve this, and is feasible. Specifically: routine information (termed Special Patient Notes) should be sent to the OoH service about vulnerable patients, including those who are case managed by CMsclear information about CM attachment to general practices and how to refer to them should be easily accessibleGPs and CMs should meet quarterly for mutual learning and to discuss patientsthe OoH service electronically should cascade information to GPs, CMs and others named in the Special Patient Notescommissioners should routinely gather data to compare clusters of general practices for i) referrals to CMs, ii) posting Special Patient Notes, iii) unscheduled consultations and hospital admissions of all patients including those being case managed. Discussion This project revealed system-wide communication problems for the care of patients being case managed by CMs, and ways to overcome these. Commissioners could insist that these are adopted locally, and gather data to prompt compliance and evaluate the consequential cost savings.
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.