ArticleDementia (London, England)2021
'We must have a new VIPS meeting soon!' Barriers and facilitators for implementing the VIPS practice model in primary health care.
Article in Dementia (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Innovative socio-sanitary rehabilitation models in central nervous system disorders: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- The interplay of leadership dynamics and person-centred practice in nursing homes: a mixed methods systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2025Review
- Cognitive Rehabilitation for People with Dementia in Norway: Case Managers' Experiences from a Pilot Study.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extraArticle
- Current Best Practice for People with Frontotemporal Dementia in Norway: A Focus Group Study with Expert Healthcare Personnel.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPerson-centred care is a philosophy of care rather than a method ready for implementation and utilisation in daily work. Internationally, few methods for the implementation of person-centred care have been widely adopted in clinical and care practice. In Norway, the VIPS practice model is a commonly used model for person-centred care implementation.
methodQualitative manifest content analysis was used. Managers and leaders in the municipalities, care institutions and domestic nursing care services were eligible for inclusion if their workplace had implemented the VIPS practice model and conducted the consensus meeting regularly for a minimum of 12 months. Seventeen respondents were included. Individual interviews were conducted either via FaceTime, Skype or telephone.
resultsThree global categories emerged describing the implementation process: (1) factors that impact the decision made at municipal level to implement person-centred care; (2) requirements for a good start at unit level and (3) factors that help to support the new routines in the unit. The categories were entwined; the results of one affected the results of the others. The informants from both domestic nursing care and institutions described the same factors as important for the implementation of the VIPS practice model.
conclusionTo implement person-centred care by use of the VIPS practice model, the frontline staff need sufficient information about the rationale for implementing the model. The management's vision and ethos of person-centred care must be followed by time set aside for staff training and regularly scheduled VIPS practice model consensus meetings. Head nurses are key to getting the new routines established and maintained and should be supported by the management.
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.