ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Pilot Implementation of a Primary Care Disease Management Concept for Venous Leg Ulceration: Results of a Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing a primary care disease management concept for venous leg ulceration: findings of a mixed-methods process evaluation in the Ulcus Cruris Care trial.BMC health services research · 2026Trial
- Treating Venous Leg Ulcers in Primary Care: The Cluster-Randomized Ulcus Cruris Care Trial.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2026Trial
- Management of Chronic Health Situations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Developing an Evidence-Based and Patient-Centred Care Concept to Address Deficits in German Primary Care of Venous Leg Ulcers: Results of an Expert Survey Within the ULCUS CRURIS CARE Project.International wound journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWithin the project "Ulcus Cruris Care", a disease management intervention to improve general practice care for patients with venous leg ulcer was developed, comprising online teaching for practice teams, standardized patient education, and case management. Implementation of the intervention was piloted and evaluated via a process evaluation. This study aims to evaluate contentedness with the intervention, implementation effort, implementation determinants, intervention fidelity, and perceived intervention effects using a mixed-methods process evaluation.
methodsThe mixed-methods process evaluation explored the views of general practitioners, medical assistants and patients regarding the intervention components. Data were collected through semi-structured telephone interviews and a survey questionnaire. Qualitative data were first analyzed inductively, followed by a deductive-inductive approach based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. Survey data were analyzed descriptively.
resultsParticipants (n = 21) reported a strong contentedness with the intervention, high intervention fidelity, low implementation effort, and a change in perception of compression therapy as the central treatment element. Healthcare professionals emphasized increased patient education and patient and family involvement. Patients reported feeling better informed and empowered to take an active role in their treatment, primarily due to increased knowledge and skills in compression therapy. As a result, they were more content with their care and reported positive experiences with wound healing since trial participation.
conclusionsThe Ulcus Cruris Care intervention can lead to a noticeable change in knowledge and potentially influence practice teams' approach to venous leg ulcer management, facilitating a significantly more frequent use of compression therapy in VLU care. A confirmatory evaluation of potential effects in a definitive RCT seems warranted.
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.