Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38992627›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

The implementation and impacts of the Comprehensive Care Standard in Australian acute care hospitals: a survey study.

Beibei Xiong, Christine Stirling, Daniel X Bailey, Melinda Martin-Khan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Development of a Patient and Carer Advisory Board to Co-Design Health Services Research for the Quality of Care of People With Dementia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

Beibei XiongCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. Beibei.Xiong@uq.edu.au.
Christine StirlingSchool of Nursing, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, 7000, Australia.
Daniel X BaileyCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
Melinda Martin-KhanCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council of the Australian Government APP1140459
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComprehensive care (CC) is becoming a widely acknowledged standard for modern healthcare as it has the potential to improve health service delivery impacting both patient-centred care and clinical outcomes. In 2019, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care mandated the implementation of the Comprehensive Care Standard (CCS). However, little is known about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in acute care hospitals. Our study aimed to explore care professionals' self-reported knowledge, experiences, and perceptions about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in Australian acute care hospitals.

methodsAn online survey using a cross-sectional design that included Australian doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals in acute care hospitals was distributed through our research team and organisation, healthcare organisations, and clinical networks using various methods, including websites, newsletters, emails, and social media platforms. The survey items covered self-reported knowledge of the CCS and confidence in performing CC, experiences in consumer involvement and CC plans, and perceptions of organisational support and impacts of CCS on patient care and health outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using Rstudio, and qualitative data were analysed thematically using Nvivo.

results864 responses were received and 649 were deemed valid responses. On average, care professionals self-reported a moderate level of knowledge of the CCS (median = 3/5) and a high level of confidence in performing CC (median = 4/5), but they self-reported receiving only a moderate level of organisational support (median = 3/5). Only 4% (n = 17) of respondents believed that all patients in their unit had CCS-compliant care plans, which was attributed to lack of knowledge, motivation, teamwork, and resources, documentation issues, system and process limitations, and environment-specific challenges. Most participants believed the CCS introduction improved many aspects of patient care and health outcomes, but also raised healthcare costs.

conclusionCare professionals are confident in performing CC but need more organisational support. Further education and training, resources, multidisciplinary collaboration, and systems and processes that support CC are needed to improve the implementation of the CCS. Perceived increased costs may hinder the sustainability of the CCS. Future research is needed to examine the cost-effectiveness of the implementation of the CCS.

Indexed as

Comprehensive Health CareAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CareSurveys and QuestionnairesCare standardComprehensive careOutcome measurementQuality of care

Identifiers

PMID38992627
PMCPMC11241846

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.