ArticleBMJ open2019
What factors influence community wound care in the UK? A focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of home-based chronic wound care training for patients and caregivers: A systematic review.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of an E-Book App on the Knowledge, Attitudes and Confidence of Nurses to Prevent and Care for Pressure Injury.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- The Barriers and Facilitators Healthcare Professionals' Experience When Assessing the Cutaneous Manifestations of Chronic Venous Insufficiency and Peripheral Arterial Disease in People With Dark Skin Tones: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Pharmacological Pain Management in Adults with Venous Ulceration: A Systematic Review.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Managing the delivery of venous leg ulcer services: A willingness to pay study.Health science reports · 2022Article
- General practitioners' knowledge of leg ulcer treatment in primary healthcare: an interview study.Primary health care research & development · 2020Article
- Podiatrists' views of assessment and management of pain in diabetes-related foot ulcers: a focus group study.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2020Article
- Understanding factors influencing venous leg ulcer guideline implementation in Australian primary care.International wound journal · 2020Article
- Use of antimicrobial dressings in England and the association with published clinical guidance: interrupted time series analysis.BMJ open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesResearch has found unwarranted variation across community wound care services in the North of England, with underuse of evidence-based practice and overuse of interventions where there is little or no known patient benefit. This study explored the factors that influence care in community settings for people with complex wounds, to develop a deeper understanding of the current context of wound care and variation in practice.
designQualitative focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to structure the questions, prompts and analyses.
settingCommunity healthcare settings in the North of England, UK.
participantsForty-six clinical professionals who cared for patients with complex wounds and eight non-clinical professionals who were responsible for procuring wound care products participated across six focus group interviews.
resultsWe found the TDF domains: environmental context and resources, knowledge, skills, social influences and behaviour regulation to best explain the variation in wound care and the underuse of research evidence. Factors such as financial pressures were perceived as having a negative effect on the continuity of care, the availability of wound care services and workloads. We found practice to be mainly based on experiential knowledge and personal preference and highly influenced by colleagues, patients and the pharmaceutical industry, although not by research evidence.
conclusionsOur study provides new insight into the role that experiential learning and social influences play in determining wound care and on the limited influence of research. Workforce pressures and limited resources are perceived to impede care by reducing patient access to services and the ability to provide holistic care. Participative collaboration between university and healthcare organisations may offer a supportive route to addressing issues, implementing sustainable changes to practice and service delivery and a resolute commitment to research use among clinical professionals.
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.