Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26463445›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

Recommendations to facilitate the ideal fit note: are they achievable in practice?

Carol Coole, Fiona Nouri, Iskra Potgieter, Paul J Watson, Louise Thomson, Rob Hampton, Avril Drummond

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Carol CooleSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham,, A Floor, Medical School, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK. Carolyn.coole@nottingham.ac.uk.
Fiona NouriSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham,, A Floor, Medical School, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK. Fiona.nouri@nottingham.ac.uk.
Iskra PotgieterResearch Design Service for East Midlands, School of Medicine, C Floor, Room 2400, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK. Iskra.potgieter@nottingham.ac.uk.
Paul J WatsonNew Academic Unit, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK. Pjw25@leicester.ac.uk.
Louise ThomsonInstitute of Mental Health, Jubilee Campus, Room D16, Wollaton Road, Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK. Louise.thomson@nottingham.ac.uk.
Rob HamptonInclusion Healthcare, Charles Berry House, 45 East Bond Street, Leicester, LE1 4SX, UK. robhampton@doctors.org.uk.
Avril DrummondSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham,, A Floor, Medical School, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2HA, UK. Avril.drummond@nottingham.ac.uk.
University of Nottingham · GBEast Sussex County Council · GBInstitute of Mental Health · GBLeicester General Hospital · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough the UK fit note has been broadly welcomed as a tool to facilitate return to work, difficulties and uncertainties have resulted in wide variation in its use. Agreement on what constitutes the 'ideal' fit note from the perspective of all stakeholders is needed to inform best practice. A recent Delphi study conducted by the authors reached consensus on 67 recommendations for best practice in fit note use for employed patients. However, such recommendations are not necessarily followed in practice. The purpose of this study was therefore to investigate the perceived achievability of implementing these Delphi recommendations with a further reference panel of stakeholders.

methodsPotential participants were identified by the research team and study steering group. These included representatives of employers, government departments, trades unions, patient organisations, general and medical practitioners and occupational health organisations who were believed to have the knowledge and experience to comment on the recommendations. The consensus Delphi statements were presented to the participants on-line. Participants were invited to comment on whether the recommendations were achievable, and what might hinder or facilitate their use in practice. Free text comments were combined with comments made in the Delphi study that referred to issues of feasibility or practicality. These were synthesised and analysed thematically.

resultsTwelve individuals representing a range of stakeholder groups participated. Many of the recommendations were considered achievable, such as improved format and use of the electronic fit note, completion of all fields, better application and revision of guidance and education in fit note use. However a number of obstacles to implementation were identified. These included: legislation governing the fit note and GP contracts; the costs and complexity of IT systems and software; the limitations of the GP consultation; unclear roles and responsibilities for the funding and delivery of education, guidance and training for all stakeholders, and the evaluation of practice.

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that although many recommendations for the ideal fit note are considered achievable, there are considerable financial, legal, organisational and professional obstacles to be overcome in order for the recommendations to be implemented successfully.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationReturn to WorkDelphi TechniqueEmploymentGeneral PracticeHumans

Identifiers

PMID26463445
PMCPMC4603918
OpenAlexW2156543487

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.