Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27875994›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2016

Do primary care professionals agree about progress with implementation of primary care teams: results from a cross sectional study.

E Tierney, M O'Sullivan, L Hickey, A Hannigan, C May, W Cullen, N Kennedy, L Kineen, A MacFarlane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Effect of the OPTIMAL programme on self-management of multimorbidity in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Primary care transformation in Scotland: a qualitative study of GPs' and multidisciplinary team members' views.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Implementing community participation via interdisciplinary teams in primary care: An Irish case study in practice.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    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

9 authors.

E TierneyGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. edel.tierney@ul.ie.ORCID 0000-0001-6393-8539
M O'SullivanGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
L HickeyGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
A HanniganGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
C MayFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
W CullenUrban General Practice, Health Sciences University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
N KennedyFaculty of Education & Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
L KineenHealth Service Executive, Merlin Park, Regional Hospital, Galway, Ireland.
A MacFarlaneGraduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care is the cornerstone of healthcare reform with policies across jurisdictions promoting interdisciplinary team working. The effective implementation of such health policies requires understanding the perspectives of all actors. However, there is a lack of research about health professionals' views of this process. This study compares Primary Healthcare Professionals' perceptions of the effectiveness of the Primary Care Strategy and Primary Care Team (PCT) implementation in Ireland.

methodsDesign and Setting: e-survey of (1) General Practitioners (GPs) associated with a Graduate Medical School (N = 100) and (2) Primary Care Professionals in 3 of 4 Health Service Executive (HSE) regions (N = 2309). After piloting, snowball sampling was used to administer the survey. Descriptive analysis was carried out using SPSS. Ratings across groups were compared using non-parametric tests.

resultsThere were 569 responses. Response rates varied across disciplines (71 % for GPs, 22 % for other Primary Healthcare Professionals (PCPs). Respondents across all disciplines viewed interdisciplinary working as important. Respondents agreed on lack of progress of implementation of formal PCTs (median rating of 2, where 1 is no progress at all and 5 is complete implementation). GPs were more negative about the effectiveness of the Strategy to promote different disciplines to work together (median rating of 2 compared to 3 for clinical therapists and 3.5 for nurses, P = 0.001). Respondents identified resources and GP participation as most important for effective team working. Protected time for meetings and capacity to manage workload for meetings were rated as very important factors for effective team working by GPs, clinical therapists and nurses. A building for co-location of teams was rated as an important factor by nurses and clinical therapists though GPs rated it as less important. Payment to attend meetings and contractual arrangements were considered important factors by GPs but not by nurses or clinical therapists.

conclusionPCPs and GPs agree there is limited PCT implementation. GPs are most negative about this implementation. There is some disagreement about which resources are most important for effective PCT working. These findings provide valuable data for clinicians and policy makers about implementation of interdisciplinary teams in primary care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelProgram DevelopmentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeneral PracticeGroup ProcessesHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationIrelandMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care TeamPerceptionPrimary Health CareRemunerationPatient care team, General practice, Interdisciplinary teams, Health policyPolicy implementation, Health care surveys, Primary health care

Identifiers

PMID27875994
PMCPMC5120534

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.