Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34922624›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2021

Strategies to implement SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care testing into primary care settings: a qualitative secondary analysis guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel.

Patrick Kierkegaard, Timothy Hicks, A Joy Allen, Yaling Yang, Gail Hayward, Margaret Glogowska, Brian D Nicholson, Peter Buckle, CONDOR Steering Committee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Implementing in-vitro diagnostic point-of-care tests in community health care: how can we make this work?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Patrick KierkegaardNIHR London In Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK. P.Kierkegaard@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8600-7956
Timothy HicksNIHR Newcastle In Vitro Diagnostics Co-Operative, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN, UK.
A Joy AllenNIHR Newcastle In Vitro Diagnostics Co-Operative, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN, UK.
Yaling YangNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Gail HaywardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Margaret GlogowskaNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Brian D NicholsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Peter BuckleNIHR London In Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK.
CONDOR Steering Committee
University of Oxford · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBSt Mary's Hospital · GB

Funding

UK Research and Innovation COV0051
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study is to develop a theory-driven understanding of the barriers and facilitators underpinning physicians' attitudes and capabilities to implementing SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care (POC) testing into primary care practices.

methodsWe used a secondary qualitative analysis approach to re-analyse data from a qualitative, interview study of 22 primary care physicians from 21 primary care practices across three regions in England. We followed the three-step method based on the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify the barriers to implementing SARS-CoV-2 POC testing and identified strategies to address these challenges.

resultsSeveral factors underpinned primary care physicians' attitudes and capabilities to implement SARS-CoV-2 POC testing into practice. First, limited knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 POC testing landscape and a demanding workload affected physicians' willingness to use the tests. Second, there was scepticism about the insufficient evidence pertaining to the clinical efficacy and utility of POC tests, which affected physicians' confidence in the accuracy of tests. Third, physicians would adopt POC tests if they were prescribed and recommended by authorities. Fourth, physicians required professional education and training to increase their confidence in using POC tests but also suggested that healthcare assistants should administer the tests. Fifth, physicians expressed concerns about their limited workload capacity and that extra resources are needed to accommodate any anticipated changes. Sixth, information sharing across practices shaped perceptions of POC tests and the quality of information influenced physician perceptions. Seventh, financial incentives could motivate physicians and were also needed to cover the associated costs of testing. Eighth, physicians were worried that society will view primary care as an alternative to community testing centres, which would change perceptions around their professional identity. Ninth, physicians' perception of assurance/risk influenced their willingness to use POC testing if it could help identify infectious individuals, but they were also concerned about the risk of occupational exposure and potentially losing staff members who would need to self-isolate.

conclusionsImproving primary care physicians' knowledgebase of SARS-CoV-2 POC tests, introducing policies to embed testing into practice, and providing resources to meet the anticipated demands of testing are critical to implementing testing into practice.

Indexed as

Behaviour change technique taxonomyBehaviour Change WheelCOVID-19Point-of-care testingPrimary careSARS-CoV-2Theoretical Domains Framework

Identifiers

PMID34922624
PMCPMC8684208
OpenAlexW4225754822

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.