Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28882108›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2017

General practitioners' perspectives on a proposed new model of service delivery for primary care management of knee osteoarthritis: a qualitative study.

Thorlene Egerton, Rachel Nelligan, Jenny Setchell, Lou Atkins, Kim L Bennell

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 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Yonder: Truthfulness, group visits, new care models, and a sense of calling.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Article
  17. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Thorlene EgertonCentre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. thor@sutmap.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4751-7624
Rachel NelliganCentre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jenny SetchellSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Lou AtkinsUniversity College London, London, UK.
Kim L BennellCentre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective management of people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) requires development of new models of care, and successful implementation relies on engagement of general practitioners (GPs). This study used a qualitative methodology to identify potential factors influencing GPs' engagement with a proposed new model of service delivery to provide evidence-based care for patients with knee OA and achieve better patient outcomes.

methodsSemi-structured telephone interviews with 11 GPs were conducted. Based on a theoretical model of behaviour, interview questions were designed to elicit perspectives on a remotely-delivered (telephone-based) service to support behaviour change and self-management for patients with knee OA, with a focus on exercise and weight loss. Transcripts were analysed using an inductive thematic approach, and GPs' opinions were organised using the APEASE (affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, safety/side effects and equity) criteria as themes.

resultsGPs expressed concerns about potential for confusion, incongruence of information and advice, disconnect with other schemes and initiatives, loss of control of patient care, lack of belief in the need and benefits of proposed service, resistance to change because of lack of familiarity with the procedures and the service, and reluctance to trust in the skills and abilities of the health professionals providing the care support. GPs also recognised the potential benefits of the extra support for patients, and improved access for remote patients to clinicians with specialist knowledge.

conclusionThe findings can be used to optimise implementation and engagement with a remotely-delivered 'care support team' model by GPs.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PractitionersTelemedicineAdultAgedBehavior TherapyDelivery of Health CareExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchSelf CareGeneral practitionerImplementationModels of careOsteoarthritisPrimary careQualitative

Identifiers

PMID28882108
PMCPMC5590156
OpenAlexW2753583477

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.