Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28235400›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2017

Implementation of cardiovascular disease prevention in primary health care: enhancing understanding using normalisation process theory.

Nerida Volker, Lauren T Williams, Rachel C Davey, Thomas Cochrane, Tanya Clancy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nerida VolkerHealth Research Institute, Centre for Research & Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, College Road, Bruce, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. nerida.volker@canberra.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-1273-3581
Lauren T WilliamsHealth Research Institute, Centre for Research & Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, College Road, Bruce, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Rachel C DaveyHealth Research Institute, Centre for Research & Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, College Road, Bruce, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Thomas CochraneHealth Research Institute, Centre for Research & Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, College Road, Bruce, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Tanya ClancyHealth Research Institute, Centre for Research & Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, College Road, Bruce, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
University of Canberra · AUGriffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe reorientation of primary health care towards prevention is fundamental to addressing the rising burden of chronic disease. However, in Australia, cardiovascular disease prevention practice in primary health care is not generally consistent with existing guidelines. The Model for Prevention study was a whole-of-system cardiovascular disease prevention intervention, with one component being enhanced lifestyle modification support and addition of a health coaching service in the general practice setting. To determine the feasibility of translating intervention outcomes into real world practice, implementation work done by stakeholders was examined using Normalisation Process Theory as a framework.

methodsData was collected through interviews with 40 intervention participants and included general practitioners, practice nurses, practice managers, lifestyle advisors and participants. Data analysis was informed by normalisation process theory constructs.

resultsStakeholders were in agreement that, while prevention is a key function of general practice, it was not their usual work. There were varying levels of engagement with the intervention by practice staff due to staff interest, capacity and turnover, but most staff reconfigured their work for required activities. The Lifestyle Advisors believed staff had varied levels of interest in and understanding of, their service, but most staff felt their role was useful. Patients expanded their existing relationships with their general practice, and most achieved their lifestyle modification goals. While the study highlighted the complex nature of the change required, many of the new or enhanced processes implemented as part of the intervention could be scaled up to improve the systems approach to prevention. Overcoming the barriers to change, such as the perception of CVD prevention as a 'hard sell', is going to rely on improving the value proposition for all stakeholders.

conclusionsThe study provided a detailed understanding of the work required to implement a complex cardiovascular disease prevention intervention within general practice. The findings highlighted the need for multiple strategies that engage all stakeholders. Normalisation process theory was a useful framework for guiding change implementation.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PractitionersNursesPreventive MedicineAustraliaCardiovascular DiseasesDelivery of Health CareFeasibility StudiesGeneral PracticeHumansModels, TheoreticalPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Management, MedicalPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchRisk Reduction BehaviorHealth coachingLifestyle modificationPractice nursePreventative health

Identifiers

PMID28235400
PMCPMC5324228
OpenAlexW2591210578

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.