Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29422076›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2018

Barriers and facilitators for the management of vertigo: a qualitative study with primary care providers.

Anna-Janina Stephan, Eva Kovacs, Amanda Phillips, Jörg Schelling, Susanne Marlene Ulrich, Eva Grill

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Surgical treatment of otogenic vertigo.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna-Janina StephanInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany. anna_janina.stephan@med.uni-muenchen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-6438-2058
Eva KovacsInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Amanda PhillipsInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Jörg SchellingInstitute for General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Susanne Marlene UlrichInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Eva GrillInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEZimmer Biomet (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung BMBF FKZ 01EO1401
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough the management of patients presenting with vertigo and dizziness in primary care has been reported to be inefficient, little is known about the primary care providers' (PCPs) perspectives, needs, and attitudes regarding vertigo management. The objective of this study was to understand which challenges and barriers PCPs see when diagnosing and treating patients presenting with vertigo or dizziness. Specifically, we wanted to identify facilitators and barriers of successful guideline implementation in order to inform the development of targeted interventions.

methodsA theory-based interview structure was developed based on the implementation theory of capability, opportunity, and motivation for behaviour change (COM-B) using questions based on constructs from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Transcripts of the semi-structured interviews were analysed using directed content analysis. The pathways through which guideline characteristics and supportive interventions affect the relationship between the PCPs' perceived capability, opportunity, and motivation as well as their practice of managing vertigo patients were graphically presented using the COM-B model structure.

resultsTwelve PCPs from Bavaria in Southern Germany participated in semi-structured interviews. Diagnostics posed the biggest challenge in vertigo management to the PCPs. Requirements for an acceptable guideline were stakeholder involvement in the development process, clarity of presentation, and high applicability. Guideline implementation might be effectively supported through educational meetings and sustained by organisational interventions.

conclusionsFrom the PCPs' perspective, both guideline characteristics and interventions supporting guideline implementation may help resolve challenges in vertigo management in primary care. These results should be used to guide future interventions in the primary care setting to ensure successful and targeted patient management.

Indexed as

Cohort StudiesGermanyHumansInterviews as TopicMalePrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchVertigoGuidelinesImplementation researchPhysician behaviourPrimary careQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID29422076
PMCPMC5806383
OpenAlexW2786967191

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.