Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38216867›Full record

ReviewBMC primary care2024

Barriers and enablers to implementing interprofessional primary care teams: a narrative review of the literature using the consolidated framework for implementation research.

Amy Grant, Julia Kontak, Elizabeth Jeffers, Beverley Lawson, Adrian MacKenzie, Fred Burge, Leah Boulos, Kelly Lackie, Emily Gard Marshall, Amy Mireault and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Frozen in time: Breaking free from past family practice models.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors.

Amy GrantMaritime SPOR Support Unit, 5790 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 1V7, Canada.
Julia KontakDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Elizabeth JeffersMaritime SPOR Support Unit, 5790 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 1V7, Canada.
Beverley LawsonDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Adrian MacKenzieNova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Fred BurgeDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Leah BoulosMaritime SPOR Support Unit, 5790 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 1V7, Canada.
Kelly LackieDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Emily Gard MarshallDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Amy MireaultMaritime SPOR Support Unit, 5790 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 1V7, Canada.
Susan PhilpottNova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Tara SampalliNova Scotia Health, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Debbie Sheppard-LeMoineFaculty of Nursing, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Ruth Martin-MisenerDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Ruth.Martin-Misener@Dal.Ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterprofessional primary care teams have been introduced across Canada to improve access (e.g., a regular primary care provider, timely access to care when needed) to and quality of primary care. However, the quality and speed of team implementation has not kept pace with increasing access issues. The aim of this research was to use an implementation framework to categorize and describe barriers and enablers to team implementation in primary care.

methodsA narrative review that prioritized systematic reviews and evidence syntheses was conducted. A search using pre-defined terms was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, and potentially relevant grey literature was identified through ad hoc Google searches and hand searching of health organization websites. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to categorize barriers and enablers into five domains: (1) Features of Team Implementation; (2) Government, Health Authorities and Health Organizations; (3) Characteristics of the Team; (4) Characteristics of Team Members; and (5) Process of Implementation.

resultsData were extracted from 19 of 435 articles that met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Most barriers and enablers were categorized into two domains of the CFIR: Characteristics of the Team and Government, Health Authorities, and Health Organizations. Key themes identified within the Characteristics of the Team domain were team-leadership, including designating a manager responsible for day-to-day activities and facilitating collaboration; clear governance structures, and technology supports and tools that facilitate information sharing and communication. Key themes within the Government, Health Authorities, and Health Organizations domain were professional remuneration plans, regulatory policy, and interprofessional education. Other key themes identified in the Features of Team Implementation included the importance of good data and research on the status of teams, as well as sufficient and stable funding models. Positive perspectives, flexibility, and feeling supported were identified in the Characteristics of Team Members domain. Within the Process of Implementation domain, shared leadership and human resources planning were discussed.

conclusionsBarriers and enablers to implementing interprofessional primary care teams using the CFIR were identified, which enables stakeholders and teams to tailor implementation of teams at the local level to impact the accessibility and quality of primary care.

Indexed as

CommunicationLeadershipCanadaHumansInformation DisseminationPrimary Health CareAccess to careConsolidated framework for implementation researchImplementationInterprofessional teamsPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID38216867
PMCPMC10785376

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.