Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31980016›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

Efficiency as a determinant of loyalty among users of a Community of Clinical Practice: a comparative study between the implementation and consolidation phases.

David Lacasta Tintorer, Josep Maria Manresa Domínguez, Ana Jiménez-Zarco, Teresa Rodríguez-Blanco, Souhel Flayeh Beneyto, Pere Torán-Monserrat, Xavier Mundet Tuduri, Francesc Saigí-Rubió

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

David Lacasta TintorerCentre d'Atenció Primària Gran Sol, Gerència d'Àmbit d'Atenció Primària Metropolitana Nord, Institut Català de la Salut. Avinguda del Doctor Bassols, 112 - 130, 08914, Badalona, Spain.
Josep Maria Manresa DomínguezUnitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Nord, IDIAP Jordi Gol, CAP El Maresme. Camí del Mig, 36 planta 4ª, 08303, Mataró, Spain.
Ana Jiménez-ZarcoFaculty of Economics and Business, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Teresa Rodríguez-BlancoUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Cerdanyola del Vallès. Campus de la UAB, Plaça Cívica, s/n, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Souhel Flayeh BeneytoCentre d'Atenció Primària Gran Sol, Gerència d'Àmbit d'Atenció Primària Metropolitana Nord, Institut Català de la Salut. Avinguda del Doctor Bassols, 112 - 130, 08914, Badalona, Spain.
Pere Torán-MonserratUnitat de Suport a la Recerca Metropolitana Nord, IDIAP Jordi Gol, CAP El Maresme. Camí del Mig, 36 planta 4ª, 08303, Mataró, Spain.
Xavier Mundet TuduriUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Cerdanyola del Vallès. Campus de la UAB, Plaça Cívica, s/n, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Francesc Saigí-RubióFaculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona. Av. Tibidabo, 39-43, 08035, Barcelona, Spain. fsaigi@uoc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9616-1551

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA community of clinical practice called the Online Communication Tool between Primary and Hospital Care (ECOPIH) was created to enable primary care and specialist care professionals to communicate with each other in order to resolve real clinical cases, thereby improving communication and coordination between care levels. The present work seeks to analyse whether ECOPIH makes it possible to reduce the number of referrals. To that end, the objectives are: (1) To find out the degree of loyalty among ECOPIH users, by comparing the medical professionals' profiles in the tool's implementation phase to those in its consolidation phase. (2) To evaluate the degree of fulfilment of users' expectations, by establishing the determining factors that had an influence on the physicians' intention to use ECOPIH in the implementation phase and observing whether its use had an effective, direct impact on the number of patient referrals that primary care physicians made to specialist care professionals.

methodsTwo studies were conducted. Based on a survey of all the physicians in a Primary Care area, Study 1 was a descriptive study in ECOPIH's implementation phase. Study 2 was a randomised intervention study of ECOPIH users in the tool's consolidation phase. The results from both studies were compared. Various bivariate and multivariate statistical techniques (exploratory factor analysis, cluster analysis, logistic regression analysis and ANOVA) were used in both studies, which were conducted on a sample of 111 and 178 physicians, respectively.

resultsWe confirmed the existence of an ECOPIH user profile stable across both phases: under-50-year-old women. Regarding the second objective, there were two particular findings. First, the discriminant factors that had an influence on greater ECOPIH use were habitual Social media website and app use and Perceived usefulness for reducing costs. Second, PC professionals who were ECOPIH members made fewer referrals to SC professionals in Cardiology, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology than older PC professionals who were not ECOPIH members.

conclusionsThe use of a community of clinical practice by primary care and specialist care professionals helps to reduce the number of referrals among medical professionals.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelInterdisciplinary CommunicationInternetPhysicians, Primary CareReferral and ConsultationSocial MediaSpecializationAdultCardiologyCost SavingsEndocrinologyFemaleGastroenterologyHospitalizationHumansImplementation ScienceContinuing medical educationPrimary health careProblem solvingReferral and consultationRemote consultationTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID31980016
PMCPMC6979059

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.