Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27875542›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2016

Educational Outreach with an Integrated Clinical Tool for Nurse-Led Non-communicable Chronic Disease Management in Primary Care in South Africa: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial.

Lara R Fairall, Naomi Folb, Venessa Timmerman, Carl Lombard, Krisela Steyn, Max O Bachmann, Eric D Bateman, Crick Lund, Ruth Cornick, Gill Faris and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. BMJ open · 2021
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Lara R FairallKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.
Naomi FolbKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2667-0956
Venessa TimmermanKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6172-9386
Carl LombardBiostatistics Unit, Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
Krisela SteynDepartment of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Max O BachmannNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Eric D BatemanKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.
Crick LundAlan J Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Ruth CornickKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7391-3383
Gill FarisKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.
Thomas GazianoChronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Daniella Georgeu-PepperKnowledge Translation Unit, University of Cape Town Lung Institute, Cape Town, South Africa.
Merrick ZwarensteinCentre for Studies in Family Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Naomi S LevittDepartment of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
University of Cape Town · ZABrigham and Women's Hospital · USSouth African Medical Research Council · ZAUniversity of East Anglia · GBWestern University · CA

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268200900030C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many low-income countries, care for patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and mental health conditions is provided by nurses. The benefits of nurse substitution and supplementation in NCD care in high-income settings are well recognised, but evidence from low- and middle-income countries is limited. Primary Care 101 (PC101) is a programme designed to support and expand nurses' role in NCD care, comprising educational outreach to nurses and a clinical management tool with enhanced prescribing provisions. We evaluated the effect of the programme on primary care nurses' capacity to manage NCDs. METHODS AND

findingsIn a cluster randomised controlled trial design, 38 public sector primary care clinics in the Western Cape Province, South Africa, were randomised. Nurses in the intervention clinics were trained to use the PC101 management tool during educational outreach sessions delivered by health department trainers and were authorised to prescribe an expanded range of drugs for several NCDs. Control clinics continued use of the Practical Approach to Lung Health and HIV/AIDS in South Africa (PALSA PLUS) management tool and usual training. Patients attending these clinics with one or more of hypertension (3,227), diabetes (1,842), chronic respiratory disease (1,157) or who screened positive for depression (2,466), totalling 4,393 patients, were enrolled between 28 March 2011 and 10 November 2011. Primary outcomes were treatment intensification in the hypertension, diabetes, and chronic respiratory disease cohorts, defined as the proportion of patients in whom treatment was escalated during follow-up over 14 mo, and case detection in the depression cohort. Primary outcome data were analysed for 2,110 (97%) intervention and 2,170 (97%) control group patients. Treatment intensification rates in intervention clinics were not superior to those in the control clinics (hypertension: 44% in the intervention group versus 40% in the control group, risk ratio [RR] 1.08 [95% CI 0.94 to 1.24; p = 0.252]; diabetes: 57% versus 50%, RR 1.10 [0.97 to 1.24; p = 0.126]; chronic respiratory disease: 14% versus 12%, RR 1.08 [0.75 to 1.55; p = 0.674]), nor was case detection of depression (18% versus 24%, RR 0.76 [0.53 to 1.10; p = 0.142]). No adverse effects of the nurses' expanded scope of practice were observed. Limitations of the study include dependence on self-reported diagnoses for inclusion in the patient cohorts, limited data on uptake of PC101 by users, reliance on process outcomes, and insufficient resources to measure important health outcomes, such as HbA1c, at follow-up.

conclusionsEducational outreach to primary care nurses to train them in the use of a management tool involving an expanded role in managing NCDs was feasible and safe but was not associated with treatment intensification or improved case detection for index diseases. This notwithstanding, the intervention, with adjustments to improve its effectiveness, has been adopted for implementation in primary care clinics throughout South Africa.

trial registrationThe trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN20283604).

Indexed as

Disease ManagementPrimary Care NursingAdultChronic DiseaseCohort StudiesDepressionDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareRespiratory Tract DiseasesSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID27875542
PMCPMC5119726
OpenAlexW2554606173

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.