Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31924178›Full record

ArticleBMC nephrology2020

Do virtual renal clinics improve access to kidney care? A preliminary impact evaluation of a virtual clinic in East London.

S A Hull, V Rajabzadeh, N Thomas, S Hoong, G Dreyer, H Rainey, N Ashman

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nephrology, 2020. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

S A HullCentre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AB, UK. s.a.hull@qmul.ac.uk.
V RajabzadehCentre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 2AB, UK.
N ThomasSchool of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University, London, UK.
S HoongRenal Unit, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
G DreyerRenal Unit, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
H RaineyRenal Unit, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
N AshmanRenal Unit, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBLondon South Bank University · GB

Funding

Health Foundation IFI round 6
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly identification of people with CKD in primary care, particularly those with risk factors such as diabetes and hypertension, enables proactive management and referral to specialist services for progressive disease. The 2019 NHS Long Term Plan endorses the development of digitally-enabled services to replace the 'unsustainable' growth of the traditional out-patient model of care.Shared views of the complete health data available in the primary care electronic health record (EHR) can bridge the divide between primary and secondary care, and offers a practical solution to widen timely access to specialist advice.

methodsWe describe an innovative community kidney service based in the renal department at Barts Health NHS Trust and four local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in east London. An impact evaluation of the changes in service delivery used quantitative data from the virtual CKD clinic and from the primary care electronic health records (EHR) of 166 participating practices. Survey and interview data from health professionals were used to explore changes to working practices.

resultsPrior to the start of the service the general nephrology referral rate was 0.8/1000 GP registered population, this rose to 2.5/1000 registered patients by the second year of the service. The majority (> 80%) did not require a traditional outpatient appointment, but could be managed with written advice for the referring clinician. The wait for specialist advice fell from 64 to 6 days. General practitioners (GPs) had positive views of the service, valuing the rapid response to clinical questions and improved access for patients unable to travel to clinic. They also reported improved confidence in managing CKD, and high levels of patient satisfaction. Nephrologists valued seeing the entire primary care record but reported concerns about the volume of referrals and changes to working practices.

conclusions'Virtual' specialist services using shared access to the complete primary care EHR are feasible and can expand capacity to deliver timely advice. To use both specialist and generalist expertise efficiently these services require support from community interventions which engage primary care clinicians in a data driven programme of service improvement.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesElectronic Health RecordsHealth Services AccessibilityTelemedicineHumansLondonPatient SatisfactionReferral and ConsultationRenal Insufficiency, ChronicCKDPrimary careVirtual clinic

Identifiers

PMID31924178
PMCPMC6954525
OpenAlexW3004574734

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.