Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30130270›Full record

Observational studyMedical care2018

Organizational Influences on Time Pressure Stressors and Potential Patient Consequences in Primary Care.

Kathryn M McDonald, Hector P Rodriguez, Stephen M Shortell

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Medical care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 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. Turning Down the Flame on Medical Gaslighting.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Physician Diagnosis and Knowledge of Mild Cognitive Impairment.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors.

Kathryn M McDonaldCenter for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research (CHP/PCOR), Stanford University, Stanford.
Hector P RodriguezSchool of Public Health, University of California.
Stephen M ShortellSchool of Public Health and Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

Funding

PA-20-072: Accelerating the Use of Evidence-based Innovation in Healthcare SystemsU19HS024075 · AHRQ · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI MEARA, ELLEN R. · 2015 to 2021
$19.8M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS024075Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute IHS-1310-06821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care teams face daily time pressures both during patient encounters and outside of appointments.

objectivesWe theorize 2 types of time pressure, and test hypotheses about organizational determinants and patient consequences of time pressure. RESEARCH

designCross-sectional, observational analysis of data from concurrent surveys of care team members and their patients. SUBJECTS: Patients (n=1291 respondents, 73.5% response rate) with diabetes and/or coronary artery disease established with practice teams (n=353 respondents, 84% response rate) at 16 primary care sites, randomly selected from 2 Accountable Care Organizations. MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: We measured team member perceptions of 2 potentially distinct time pressure constructs: (1) encounter-level, from 7 questions about likelihood that time pressure results in missing patient management opportunities; and (2) practice-level, using practice atmosphere rating from calm to chaotic. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-11) instrument measured patient-reported experience. Multivariate logistic regression models examined organizational predictors of each time pressure type, and hierarchical models examined time pressure predictors of patient-reported experiences.

resultsEncounter-level and practice-level time pressure measures were not correlated, nor predicted by the same organizational variables, supporting the hypothesis of two distinct time pressure constructs. More encounter-level time pressure was most strongly associated with less health information technology capability (odds ratio, 0.33; P<0.01). Greater practice-level time pressure (chaos) was associated with lower PACIC-11 scores (odds ratio, 0.74; P<0.01).

conclusionsDifferent organizational factors are associated with each forms of time pressure. Potential consequences for patients are missed opportunities in patient care and inadequate chronic care support.

Indexed as

Time FactorsAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioPrimary Health CareQuality of Health CareStress, PsychologicalSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkload

Identifiers

PMID30130270
PMCPMC6402989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.