Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29581198›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Care home services at the vanguard: a qualitative study exploring stakeholder views on the development and evaluation of novel, integrated approaches to enhancing healthcare in care homes.

Rachel Stocker, Claire Bamford, Katie Brittain, Rachel Duncan, Suzanne Moffatt, Louise Robinson, Barbara Hanratty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Rachel StockerInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Claire BamfordInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Katie BrittainDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery & Health, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Rachel DuncanInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Suzanne MoffattInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Louise RobinsonInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0209-2503
Barbara HanrattyInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore stakeholders' understanding of novel integrated approaches to enhancing care in care homes (a care home 'vanguard') and identify priorities for evaluation.

designA qualitative study, using semistructured interviews with commissioners and service providers to/within care homes, and third sector organisations with thematic analysis.

settingA Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) area in England.

participantsThirty interviewees from care homes, the National Health Service (NHS; England) and local authority, third sector (10 care home managers, 5 general practitioners, 4 CCG employees, 4 local authority employees, 1 national (NHS England) vanguard lead, 2 specialist nurses, 2 geriatricians, 1 third sector and 1 health manager).

resultsFour higher level themes emerged from the data: understanding of proposed changes, communication, evaluation of outcome measures of success, and trust and complexity. The vision for the new programme was shared by stakeholders, with importance attached to equitable access to high-quality care. Support for the programme was described as being 'the right thing to do', inferring a moral imperative. However, the practical implications of key aspects, such as integrated working, were not clearly understood and the programme was perceived by some as being imposed, top down, from the health service. Barriers and facilitators to change were identified across themes of communication, outcomes, trust and complexity. Importance was attached to the measurement of intangible aspects of success, such as collaboration. Interviewees understood that outcome-based commissioning was one element of the new programme, but discussion of their aspirations and practices revealed values and beliefs more compatible with a system based on trust.

conclusionsInnovation in service delivery requires organisations to adopt common priorities and share responsibility for success. The vanguard programme is working to ensure health and local authorities have this commitment, but engaging care homes that may feel isolated from the welfare system needs sustained dialogue over the longer term. Evaluation of the programme needs to measure what is important to stakeholders, and not focus too closely on resource consumption.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedHome Care ServicesQuality of Health CareEnglandHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNursing HomesProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchState Medicinedelivery of health carehealth policyhealth services for the agedintegratedqualitative researchresidential facilities

Identifiers

PMID29581198
PMCPMC5875673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.