Trial reportBMC family practice2019
Preventive Evidence into Practice: what factors matter in a facilitation intervention to prevent vascular disease in family practice?
Trial report in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of factors influencing the commissioning, delivery, and uptake of general health checks: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Multifaceted intervention to increase the delivery of alcohol brief interventions in primary care: a mixed-methods process analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
- Understanding factors affecting implementation success and sustainability of a comprehensive prevention program for cardiovascular disease in primary health care: a qualitative process evaluation study combining RE-AIM and CFIR.Primary health care research & development · 2023Article
- Tailoring Implementation Strategies for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Calculator Adoption in Primary Care Clinics.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2022Article
- Using mixed-methods in evidence-based nursing: a scoping review guided by a socio-ecological perspective.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2022Article
- Interprofessional advanced access - a quality improvement protocol for expanding access to primary care services.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Developing and Testing a Local Expert-Based Reading Process for Use to Examine Discrepancies Between Guidelines and Current Clinical Practices.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- The Effects of Major Disruptions on Practice Participation in Facilitation During a Primary Care Quality Improvement Initiative.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
- Effective Facilitator Strategies for Supporting Primary Care Practice Change: A Mixed Methods Study.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA perennial challenge of primary care quality improvement is to establish why interventions work in some circumstances, but not others. This study aimed to identify factors explaining variations in the impact on clinical practice of a facilitation led vascular health intervention in Australian family practice.
methodsOur mixed methods study was embedded within a cluster randomised controlled trial of a facilitation intervention designed to increase the uptake of evidence-based prevention of vascular disease in family practices. The study was set in four Australian states using eight of the study's 16 intervention practices. Facilitators worked with intervention practices to develop and implement improvements in preventive care informed by a vascular risk factor audit. We constructed case studies of each practice's "intervention narrative" from semi-structured interviews with clinicians, facilitators and other staff, practice observation, and document analysis of facilitator diaries. The intervention narratives were combined with pre- and post-intervention audit data to generate typologies of practice responses to the intervention.
resultsWe found substantial variability between practices in the changes made to vascular risk recording. Context (i.e. practice size), adaptive reserve (i.e. interpersonal relationships, manager and nurse involvement), and occasional data idiosyncrasies interacted to influence this variability.
conclusionThe findings emphasise the importance of tailoring facilitation interventions to practice size, clinician engagement and, critically, the organisation of, and relationships between, the members of the practice team.
trial registrationThe trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTR N12612000578808 (29/5/2012). This trial registration is retrospective as our first patient returned their consent on the 21/5/2012. Patient recruitment was ongoing until 31/10/2012.
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.