Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29940992›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2018

Using information communication technology in models of integrated community-based primary health care: learning from the iCOACH case studies.

Carolyn Steele Gray, Jan Barnsley, Dominique Gagnon, Louise Belzile, Tim Kenealy, James Shaw, Nicolette Sheridan, Paul Wankah Nji, Walter P Wodchis

Abstract 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. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

9 authors.

Carolyn Steele GrayBridgepoint Collaboratory for Research and Innovation, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, 1 Bridgepoint Drive, Toronto, M4M 2B5, Canada. Carolyn.SteeleGray@sinaihealthsystem.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-2146-0001
Jan BarnsleyInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, Ontario, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Dominique GagnonUnité d'enseignement et de recherche en sciences du développement humain et social, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Val-d'Or, Canada.
Louise BelzileGerontology, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada.
Tim KenealySouth Auckland Clinical School, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
James ShawInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, Ontario, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Nicolette SheridanCentre for Nursing and Health Research, School of Nursing, College of Health Te Kura Hauora Tengata, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Paul Wankah NjiSciences de la Santé, Centre de Recherche-Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Université de Sherbrooke-Campus Longueuil, Longueuil, Canada.
Walter P WodchisInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College St., Toronto, Ontario, M5T 3M6, Canada.

Funding

CIHR TTF-128263
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformation communication technology (ICT) is a critical enabler of integrated models of community-based primary health care; however, little is known about how existing technologies have been used to support new models of integrated care. To address this gap, we draw on data from an international study of integrated models, exploring how ICT is used to support activities of integrated care and the organizational and environmental barriers and enablers to its adoption.

methodsWe take an embedded comparative multiple-case study approach using data from a study of implementation of nine models of integrated community-based primary health care, the Implementing Integrated Care for Older Adults with Complex Health Needs (iCOACH) study. Six cases from Canada, three each in Ontario and Quebec, and three in New Zealand, were studied. As part of the case studies, interviews were conducted with managers and front-line health care providers from February 2015 to March 2017. A qualitative descriptive approach was used to code data from 137 interviews and generate word tables to guide analysis.

resultsDespite different models and contexts, we found strikingly similar accounts of the types of activities supported through ICT systems in each of the cases. ICT systems were used most frequently to support activities like care coordination by inter-professional teams through information sharing. However, providers were limited in their ability to efficiently share patient data due to data access issues across organizational and professional boundaries and due to system functionality limitations, such as a lack of interoperability.

conclusionsEven in innovative models of care, managers and providers in our cases mainly use technology to enable traditional ways of working. Technology limitations prevent more innovative uses of technology that could support disruption necessary to improve care delivery. We argue the barriers to more innovative use of technology are linked to three factors: (1) information access barriers, (2) limited functionality of available technology, and (3) organizational and provider inertia.

Indexed as

Information SystemsOrganizational InnovationAgedCommunity Health ServicesDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedHumansNew ZealandOntarioPrimary Health CareQuebecWork SimplificationChronic illnessesDisruptive innovationHealth information technologyImplementationIntegrated health care systemsMulti-morbidity

Identifiers

PMID29940992
PMCPMC6019521

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.