Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31722944›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2019

Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: study protocol of the process evaluation of a quasi-experimental multi-centre study regarding an admission and discharge model in Germany (VESPEERA).

Johanna Forstner, Aline Kunz, Cornelia Straßner, Lorenz Uhlmann, Stephanie Kuemmel, Joachim Szecsenyi, Michel Wensing

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Focusing on intersectorality-strategies and current research projects for the care of geriatric people].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Johanna ForstnerDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany johanna.forstner@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0002-3052-5030
Aline KunzDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Cornelia StraßnerDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Lorenz UhlmannInstitute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Stephanie KuemmelaQua-Institut GmbH, Göttingen, Germany.
Joachim SzecsenyiDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michel WensingDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEAqua Consult Ingenieur (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHospital stays are critical events as they often disrupt continuity of care. This process evaluation aims to describe and explore the implementation of the VESPEERA programme (Improving continuity of patient care across sectors: An admission and discharge model in general practices and hospitals, V METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The process evaluation is linked to the VESPEERA outcomes evaluation, which has a quasi-experimental multi-centre design with four study arms and is conducted in hospitals and general practices in Germany. The VESPEERA programme comprises several components: an assessment before admission, an admission letter, a telephonic discharge conversation between hospital and general practice before discharge, discharge information for patients, structured planning of follow-up care after discharge in the general practice and a telephone monitoring for patients with a risk of rehospitalisation. The process evaluation has a mixed-methods design, incorporating interviews (patients, both care providers who do and do not participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=75), questionnaires (patients and care providers who participate in the VESPEERA programme, total n=475), implementation plans of hospitals, data documented in general practices, claims-based data and hospital process data. Data analysis is descriptive and explorative. Qualitative data will be transcribed and analysed using framework analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Associations between the outcomes of the program and measures in the process evaluation will be explored in regression models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained by the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg prior to the start of the study (S-352/2018). Results will be disseminated through a final report to the funding agency, articles in peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.drks.de/DRKS00015183. TRIAL STATUS: The study protocol on hand is the protocol V.1.1 from 18 June 2018. Recruitment for interviews started on 3 September 2018 and will approximately be completed by the end of May 2019.

Indexed as

HospitalizationPatient DischargeAftercareAmbulatory CareContinuity of Patient CareGeneral PracticeGermanyHumansPatient HandoffPatient ReadmissionQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementTelephoneadmission managementCFIRcontinuity of caredeterminants for implementationdischarge managementprocess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID31722944
PMCPMC6858220
OpenAlexW2986389894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.