Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27435921›Full record

Observational studyRheumatology international2016

Evaluation of the impact of nursing clinics in the rheumatology services.

Santiago Muñoz-Fernández, Ma Dolores Aguilar, Amparo Rodríguez, Raquel Almodóvar, Laura Cano-García, Luís Antonio Gracia, José A Román-Ivorra, J Ramón Rodríguez, Teresa Navío, Pablo Lázaro and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Rheumatology international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
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

11 authors.

Santiago Muñoz-FernándezRheumatology Section, Hospital Universitario Infanta Sofía, San Sebastián de los Reyes (Madrid), Universidad Europea de Madrid, Paseo de Europa 34. San Sebastián de los Reyes, 28702, Madrid, Spain. santiago.munoz@salud.madrid.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2758-2085
Ma Dolores Aguilar, Madrid, Spain.
Amparo RodríguezRheumatology Section, Hospital Universitario Infanta Sofía, San Sebastián de los Reyes (Madrid), Universidad Europea de Madrid, Paseo de Europa 34. San Sebastián de los Reyes, 28702, Madrid, Spain.
Raquel AlmodóvarRheumatology Unit, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain.
Laura Cano-GarcíaRheumatology Clinical Management Unit, Málaga Institute of Biomedical Research (Instituto de Investigación biomédica de Málaga, IBIMA), Hospital Regional de Málaga, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain.
Luís Antonio GraciaRheumatology Section, Hospital de Sagunto, Valencia, Spain.
José A Román-IvorraResearch Unit from the Rheumatology Service, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Universidad Católica, Valencia, Spain.
J Ramón RodríguezRheumatology Unit, Hospital General de Vic, Vic, Barcelona, Spain.
Teresa NavíoRheumatology Section, Hospital Universitario Infanta Leonor, Madrid, Spain.
Pablo Lázaro, Madrid, Spain.
SCORE Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nursing clinics in rheumatology (NCRs) are organisational care models that provide care centred within the scope of a nurse's abilities. To analyse the impact of NCR in the rheumatology services, national multicenter observational prospective cohort studied 1-year follow-up, comparing patients attending rheumatology services with and without NCR. NCR was defined by the presence of: (1) office itself; (2) at least one dedicated nurse; and (3) its own appointment schedule. Variables included were (baseline, 6 and 12 months): (a) test to evaluate clinical activity of the disease, research and training, infrastructure of unit and resources of NCR and (b) tests to evaluate socio-demographics, work productivity (WPAI), use of services and treatments and quality of life. A total of 393 rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis patients were included: 181 NCR and 212 not NCR, corresponding to 39 units, 21 with NCR and 18 without NCR (age 53 + 11.8 vs 56 + 13.5 years). Statistically significant differences were found in patients attended in sites without NCR, at some of the visits (baseline, 6 or 12 months), for the following parameters: higher CRP level (5.9 mg/l ± 8.3 vs 4.8 mg/l ± 7.8; p < 0.005), global disease evaluation by the patient (3.6 ± 2.3 vs 3.1 ± 2.4), physician (2.9 ± 2.1 vs 2.3 ± 2.1; p < 0.05), use of primary care consultations (2.7 ± 5.4 vs 1.4 ± 2.3; p < 0.001) and worse work productivity. The presence of NCR in the rheumatology services contributes to improve some clinical outcomes, a lower frequency of primary care consultations and better work productivity of patients with rheumatic diseases.

Indexed as

NursesRheumatologyAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRheumatic DiseasesTreatment OutcomeAnkylosing spondylitisHealth services researchNursingQuality indicatorsRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.