ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2025
Improving access, mixed continuity: effects of multidisciplinary teams on primary health-care in Finland - a quasi-experimental study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persistence and truth in research and practice.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Healthcare cost trajectories with a multidisciplinary team model: a three-year follow-up from Finnish primary and secondary care.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Can multidisciplinary teams improve the quality of primary care? A scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach in primary care is a relatively recent innovation, developed over the past 15 years. There is limited data on MDTs' effects on Quadruple Aim (QA) goals. The object of this study is to evaluate the implementation of a novel MDT from 2021 to 2023 and its impact on access and continuity of care, compared to an established model. Future research will explore its effects on staff satisfaction, costs, and health outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: This quasi-experimental study compares five intervention health centers with three control centers. It includes all primary care patients from 2021 to 2023, presenting data on access and continuity before and after the intervention.
interventionNurse-only consultations were replaced with a multidisciplinary nurse-physician model to address issues during initial contact more effectively. Nurses also took on the role of case managers, enhancing relational continuity. Lean daily visual management with continuous improvement, strategic goal setting, and coaching leadership style were implemented.
main outcome measuresAccess was measured using the 'third available appointment' (T3) metric, and continuity with the COC-index, both for physicians only.
resultsAccess improved at all intervention centers, with T3 reduced from 90 to 1.125-4.75 days, while controls remained at 90 days. COC improved at three intervention centers but declined at two, with declines also observed at control centers.
conclusionThe novel MDT enhanced primary care access compared to the traditional model. However, relying solely on T3 may be insufficient for evaluating effectiveness. Mixed results in continuity underscore the need for further investigation.
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.