Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26747032›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Are there long-term benefits of experiential, interprofessional education for non-specialists on clinical behaviours and outcomes in diabetes care? A cohort study.

Daniel Ching, Denise Forte, Elizabeth Aitchison, Kenneth Earle

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel ChingSt George's University of London, London, UK.
Denise ForteSt George's University of London, London, UK.
Elizabeth AitchisonSt George's University of London, London, UK.
Kenneth EarleSt George's University of London, London, UK Thomas Addison Unit, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
St George's, University of London · GBSt George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOur aim was to assess the impact of an educational initiative for non-specialist, healthcare professionals in the community on the process and quality measures of diabetes care delivered, and changes in their learning experiences and clinical management behaviour in the short and long term.

settingSingle locality of 26 primary care practices associated with one secondary centre.

participantsGeneral practitioners and practice nurses managing 4167 patients with diabetes.

interventionA rolling 10-week, experiential, interprofessional education programme delivered to 57 practitioners and observations in practice. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were changes in the proportion of patients receiving foot care, urine albumin:creatinine ratio assessments and achieving National Quality Outcome Framework targets for blood pressure (<145/80 mm Hg), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; >86 mmol/mol (10%) and <57.4 mmol/mol (7.4%)) and total cholesterol (<5 mmol/L) thresholds. Secondary outcomes were evidence of sustained learning and changes in the number of patients referred to secondary care.

resultsEvaluation of care processes and quality outcomes took place 15 months after the programme was initiated. The proportion of patients with a HbA1c of <57.4 mmol/mol (7.4%) and >85 mmol/mol (10%) was significantly higher (44% vs 53% p=0.0001) and lower (12.5% vs 10%; p=0.002) respectively. There was an increase in the proportion (95% CI) of patients receiving foot care reviews (+26.0% (24.0% to 28.1%)), microalbuminuria screening (+29.8% (27.7% to 31.9%)) and who achieved targets for blood pressure (+9.6% (7.5% to 11.6%)) and total cholesterol (+14.4% (12.3% to 16.5%); p<0.001). 241 fewer patients were referred to secondary care. Increases in the healthcare professional's confidence and collaborative clinical behaviour were evident 3 years after completing the programme.

conclusionsAn experiential, interprofessional intervention can result in significant improvements in quality outcomes in association with a sustained impact on behaviours and practices.

Indexed as

Cohort StudiesDiabetes MellitusEducation, Medical, ContinuingGeneral PractitionersHumansInterviews as TopicLondonNursesOutcome Assessment, Health CarePrimary Health CareTimeDIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGYPRIMARY CAREQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID26747032
PMCPMC4716186
OpenAlexW2228262939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.