Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2022
The Coordination Toolkit and Coaching Project: Cluster-Randomized Quality Improvement Initiative to Improve Patient Experience of Care Coordination.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03063294 (Improving PACT Coordination Across Settings and Services), which is not on this 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.
Improving PACT Coordination Across Settings and Services (QUE 15-276)
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Fertility Preservation Services for Adolescents and Young Adults: 2022 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Landscape Assessment.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Dissemination, adaptation, and uptake of patient-facing materials to improve care coordination in primary care.PEC innovation · 2025Article
- Virtual practice facilitation as an implementation strategy for launching opioid safety committees for quality improvement in primary care: feasibility, acceptability, and intervention fidelity.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Reflective writing: a tool to support continuous learning and improved effectiveness in implementation facilitators.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven persistent gaps in coordination of care for medically complex primary care patients, efficient strategies are needed to promote better care coordination.
objectiveThe Coordination Toolkit and Coaching project compared two toolkit-based strategies of differing intensity to improve care coordination at VA primary care clinics.
designMulti-site, cluster-randomized QI initiative.
participantsTwelve VA primary care clinics matched in 6 pairs.
interventionsWe used a computer-generated allocation sequence to randomize clinics within each pair to two implementation strategies. Active control clinics received an online toolkit with evidence-based tools and QI coaching manual. Intervention clinics received the online toolkit plus weekly assistance from a distance coach for 12 months. MAIN MEASURES: We quantified patient experience of general care coordination using the Health Care System Hassles Scale (primary outcome) mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to serial cross-sectional patient samples. We measured the difference-in-difference (DiD) in clinic-level-predicted mean counts of hassles between coached and non-coached clinics, adjusting for clustering and patient characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and bootstrapping to obtain 95% confidence intervals. Other measures included care coordination QI projects attempted, tools adopted, and patient-reported exposure to projects. KEY
resultsN = 2,484 (49%) patients completed baseline surveys and 2,481 (48%) completed follow-ups. Six coached clinics versus five non-coached clinics attempted QI projects. All coached clinics versus two non-coached clinics attempted more than one project or projects that were multifaceted (i.e., involving multiple components addressing a common goal). Five coached versus three non-coached clinics used 1-2 toolkit tools. Both the coached and non-coached clinics experienced pre-post reductions in hassle counts over the study period (- 0.42 (- 0.76, - 0.08) non-coached; - 0.40 (- 0.75, - 0.06) coached). However, the DiD (0.02 (- 0.47, 0.50)) was not statistically significant; coaching did not improve patient experience of care coordination relative to the toolkit alone.
conclusionAlthough coached clinics attempted more or more complex QI projects and used more tools than non-coached clinics, coaching provided no additional benefit versus the online toolkit alone in patient-reported outcomes.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03063294.
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.