ArticleThe Permanente journal2017
Implementation and Evaluation of the Safety Net Specialty Care Program in the Denver Metropolitan Area.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Challenge of Integrating eHealth Into Health Care: Systematic Literature Review of the Donabedian Model of Structure, Process, and Outcome.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Electronic consultations (E-consults) and their outcomes: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled it
- "Hypertension is such a difficult disease to manage": federally qualified health center staff- and leadership-perceived readiness to implement a technology-facilitated team-based hypertension model.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Development of a communication platform for patients with head and neck cancer for effective information delivery and improvement of doctor-patient relationship: application of treatment journey-based service blueprint.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Review
- Let's Care for Those in Need-Today: Collaborating to Solve the Uninsured Crisis in America.The Permanente journal · 2020Article
- Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance access to specialist care: a scoping review.BMJ global health · 2019Article
- Specialty-care access for community health clinic patients: processes and barriers.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn response to limited access to specialty care in safety-net settings, an integrated delivery system and three safety-net organizations in the Denver, CO, metropolitan area launched a unique program in 2013. The program offers safety-net providers the option to electronically consult with specialists. Uninsured patients may be seen by specialists in office visits for a defined set of services. This article describes the program, identifies aspects that have worked well and areas that need improvement, and offers lessons learned.
methodsWe quantified electronic consultations (e-consults) between safety-net clinicians and specialists, and face-to-face specialist visits between May 2013 and December 2014. We reviewed and categorized all e-consults from November and December 2014. In 2015, we interviewed 21 safety-net clinicians and staff, 12 specialists, and 10 patients, and conducted a thematic analysis to determine factors facilitating and limiting optimal program use.
resultsIn the first 20 months of the program, safety-net clinicians at 23 clinics made 602 e-consults to specialists, and 81 patients received face-to-face specialist visits. Of 204 primary care clinicians, 103 made e-consults; 65 specialists participated in the program. Aspects facilitating program use were referral case managers' involvement and the use of clear, concise questions in e-consults. Key recommendations for process improvement were to promote an understanding of the different health care contexts, support provider-to-provider communication, facilitate hand-offs between settings, and clarify program scope.
conclusionParticipants perceived the program as responsive to their needs, yet opportunities exist for continued uptake and expansion. Communitywide efforts to assess and address needs remain important.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.