Trial reportBMC health services research2018
Independent medical evaluation for sick-listed patients: a focus group study of GPs´ expectations and experiences.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02524392 (Effect Evaluation of Independent Medical Evaluation), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Effect Evaluation of Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) After Six Months Sick Leave: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) Versus Treatment as Usual in Norway
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- What is the effect of independent medical evaluation on days on sickness benefits for long-term sick listed employees in Norway? A pragmatic randomised controlled trial, the NIME-trial.BMC public health · 2022Trial
- Implementing work-related Mental health guidelines in general PRacticE (IMPRovE): a protocol for a hybrid III parallel cluster randomised controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Independent medical evaluation of general practitioners' follow-up of sick-listed patients: a cross-sectional study in Norway.BMJ open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNorwegian general practitioners (GPs) are important stakeholders because they manage 80% of people on long-term sick-leave. Independent medical evaluation (IME) for long-term sick-listed patients is being evaluated in a large randomized controlled trial in one county in Norway in an effort to lower the national sick-leave rate (the NIME trial: Effect Evaluation of IME in Norway). The aim of the current study was to explore GPs' expectations of and experiences with IMEs.
methodsWe conducted three focus group interviews with a convenience sample of 14 GPs who had had 2-9 (mean 5) of their long-term sick-listed patients summoned to an IME. We asked them to recollect and describe their concrete expectations of and experiences with patients assigned to an IME. Systematic text condensation, a method for thematic cross-case analysis, was applied for analysis.
resultsTo care for and to reassure their assigned sick-listed patients, the participants had spent time and applied different strategies before their patients had attended an IME. The participants welcomed a second opinion from an experienced GP colleague as a way of obtaining constructive advice for further sick-leave measures and/or medical advice. However, they mainly described the IME reports in negative terms, as these were either too categorical or provided unusable advice for further follow-up of their sick-listed patients. The participants did not agree with the proposed routine use of IMEs but instead suggested that GPs should be able to select particularly challenging sick-listed patients for an IME, which should be performed by a peer.
conclusionOur participants showed positive attitudes towards second opinions but found the regular IMEs to be unsuitable. The participants did however welcome IMEs if they themselves could select particularly challenging patients for a mandatory second opinion by a peer but emphasized that IME-doctors should not be able to overrule a GP's sick-leave recommendation. These findings, together with other evaluations, will serve as a basis for the Norwegian government's decision on whether or not to implement IMEs for long-term sick-listed patients.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02524392 . Registered 23 June, 2015.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.