ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2018
Experiences of practice facilitators working on the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care project: Retrospective case study.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Attributes of High-Performing Small Practices in a Guideline Implementation: A Multiple-Case Study.Journal of primary care & community healthTrial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the barriers to and facilitators of practice facilitation experienced by participants in the Improving Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project.
designCase studies of practice facilitators' narrative reports.
settingEastern Ontario.
participantsPrimary care practices that participated in the IDOCC project.
main outcome measuresCases were identified by calculating sum scores in order to determine practices' performance relative to their peers. Two case exemplars were selected that scored within ± 1 SD of the total mean score, and a qualitative analysis of practice facilitators' narrative reports was conducted using a 5-factor implementation framework to identify barriers and facilitators. Narratives were divided into 3 phases: planning, implementation, and sustainability.
resultsBarriers and facilitators fluctuated over the intervention's 3 phases. Site A reported more barriers (n = 47) than facilitators (n = 38), while site B reported a roughly equal number of barriers (n = 144) and facilitators (n = 136). In both sites, the most common barriers involved organizational and provider factors and the most common facilitators were associated with innovation and structural factors.
conclusionBoth practices encountered various barriers and facilitators throughout the IDOCC's 3 phases. The case studies reveal the complex interactions of these factors over time, and provide insight into the implementation of practice facilitation programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29358265PMC5962976What 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.