Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31063506›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2019

Barriers and facilitators to care for individuals with sickle cell disease in central North Carolina: The emergency department providers' perspective.

Rita Vanessa Masese, Dominique Bulgin, Christian Douglas, Nirmish Shah, Paula Tanabe

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Provider Implicit Racial Bias in Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rita Vanessa MaseseDuke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1431-8840
Dominique BulginDuke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Christian DouglasDuke University Office of Clinical Research, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Nirmish ShahDuke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Paula TanabeDuke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Duke University · USDuke Medical Center · US

Funding

Data Coordinating Center for Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC)U24HL133948 · NHLBI · RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE · PI JACOBS, SARA RUBIN, KRONER, BARBARA L · 2016 to 2021
$7.3M
New York City Sickle Cell Implementation Science ConsortiumU01HL133997 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI RICHARDSON, LYNNE D. · 2016 to 2021
$5.4M
The Implementation of Cognitive Screening and Educational Support to Improve Outcomes of Adolescents and Young Adults with Sickle Cell Disease: From Clinic to the Community and BackU01HL133994 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI KING, ALLISON A · 2016 to 2021
$5.2M
Improving Sickle cell care in Adolescents & Adults in Chicago (ISAAC)U01HL134042 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI GORDEUK, VICTOR R, HIRSCHTICK, JANA · 2016 to 2021
$5.1M
Implementation of Medical Homes for Evidence Based Care of Adolescents and Adults with Sickle Cell DiseaseU01HL134004 · NHLBI · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI GIBSON, ROBERT WILLIAM, KUTLAR, ABDULLAH · 2016 to 2021
$5.0M
Improving SCD Care using Web-based Guidelines, Nurse Care Managers and Peer Mentors in Primary Care and Emergency Departments in Central North CarolinaU01HL133964 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI SHAH, NIRMISH R, TANABE, PAULA · 2016 to 2021
$4.8M
RE-aiming at Hydroxyurea Adherence for Sickle cell with mHealth (RE-HASH)U01HL133996 · NHLBI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI HANKINS, JANE SILVA, KLESGES, LISA M · 2016 to 2021
$4.6M
SC-Links - Linking the Sickle Cell Community, Providers and Systems to Improve Sickle Cell Disease CareU01HL134007 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI TREADWELL, MARSHA J, VICHINSKY, ELLIOTT P · 2016 to 2021
$4.1M
Implementation of a Sickle Cell Enhanced Novel Care Network in South Carolina (iSCENSC)U01HL133990 · NHLBI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI FLOREZ, HERMES JOSE · 2016 to 2021
$4.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL133964NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL133990NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL133994NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL133996NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL133997NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL134004NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL134007NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL134042NHLBI NIH HHS U24 HL133948
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited blood disorder associated with acute pain crisis and other complications that lead to frequent emergency department (ED) visits. To improve outcomes, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) published recommendations for management of acute pain crisis. NHLBI also funded eight centers across the United States to participate in the Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium. This six-year effort consists of two phases. Phase one involved conducting needs assessments of barriers and facilitators to SCD care. The aim of this study was to describe challenges and facilitators to caring for SCD from the perspective of ED providers in central North Carolina (NC). METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a needs assessment survey with ED providers throughout NC. We also conducted focus groups and an interview with ED providers from three healthcare facilities in central NC. One hundred and eleven surveys (60.6% physicians, 26% registered nurses, 13.5% physician assistants) were completed and 13 providers participated in 3 focus groups and 1 interview. Slightly more than half (50. 4%) utilized individualized dosing protocols to treat sickle cell pain. Only 32.4% of the providers were aware of the NHLBI SCD recommendations. Barriers to care from the survey included: patient behavior (67.57%), the opioid epidemic (67.57%), overcrowding (64.86%), and concern about addiction (49.55%). Perceived barriers to care identified in the focus groups and interview included: high patient volumes, lack of SCD care protocols, poor communication among providers and stigma. Facilitators to care included: individualized pain plans, comfort prescribing opioids and electronic medical records.

conclusionSCD care is influenced by many factors. Our results illuminate the need for increased use of the NHLBI SCD recommendations, individualized pain protocols, and use of electronic medical records and other care-interventions, specifically geared towards improving provider knowledge and mitigating provider bias.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEmergency Service, HospitalNursesPain ManagementPhysiciansAdultAnalgesics, OpioidAnemia, Sickle CellFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorth CarolinaPainAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID31063506
PMCPMC6504169
OpenAlexW2944252635

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.