Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30107796›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Implementing and evaluating a primary care service for oral surgery: a case study.

Joanna Goldthorpe, Caroline Sanders, Lesley Gough, Jean Rogers, Colette Bridgman, Martin Tickle, Iain Pretty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Joanna GoldthorpeManchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Coupland 1 Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. joanna.goldthorpe@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7839-7544
Caroline SandersDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Lesley GoughPublic Health England, Cheshire and Merseyside PHE Centre 5th Floor, Rail House, Lord Nelson Street, Liverpool, L1 1JF, UK.
Jean RogersNHS England North, Regatta Place, Brunswick Business Park, Summers Road, Liverpool, L3 4BL, UK.
Colette BridgmanPrimary Care Division, Directorate of Primary Care and Innovation, Health and Social Services Group, Welsh Government, Cardiff, UK.
Martin TickleDivision of Dentistry, University of Manchester, J R Moore Building, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Iain PrettyColgate Palmolive - University of Manchester Dental Health Unit, Williams House, Manchester Science Park, M15 6SE, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 11/1022/15Health Services and Delivery Research Programme 11/1022/15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA primary care oral surgery service was commissioned alongside an electronic referral management system in England, in response to rising demand for Oral Surgery services in secondary care. It is important to ensure that standards of quality and safety are similar to those in existing secondary care services, and that the new service is acceptable to stakeholders. The aim of this study is therefore to conduct an in depth case study to explore safety, quality, acceptability and implementation of the new service.

methodsThis case study draws on multiple sources of evidence to report on the commissioning process, implementation, treatment outcomes and acceptability to patients relating to a new oral surgery service in a primary care setting. A combination of audit data and interviews were analysed.

resultsMost referrals to the new service consisted of tooth extractions of appropriate complexity for the service. There were issues with lack of awareness of the new service in a primary care setting within referring primary care practices and patients at the start of implementation, however over time the service became a fully integrated part of the service landscape. Complications reported following surgery were low.

conclusionPatients liked the convenience of the new service in terms of shorter waiting time and geographical location and their patient reported experience measures and outcomes were similar to those reported in secondary care. Providing appropriate clinical governance was in place, oral surgery could safely be provided in a primary care setting for patients without complex medical needs. Attention needs to be paid to communication with general dental practices around changes to the service pathway during the early implementation period to ensure all patients can receive care in the most appropriate setting.

Indexed as

Oral Surgical ProceduresProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationAdolescentAdultAgedEnglandFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedOrganizational Case StudiesPrimary Health CareYoung AdultDemand managementOral surgeryOrganisational case studiesPatient satisfactionPrimary health careReferral management

Identifiers

PMID30107796
PMCPMC6092788

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.