ArticleAfrican journal of primary health care & family medicine2025
Guidelines for interprofessional practice in rehabilitation at primary health care level.
Article in African journal of primary health care & family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional practice (IPP) is essential for strengthening rehabilitation services within primary health care (PHC) settings. However, many healthcare professionals currently in the workforce have not been trained in interprofessional education (IPE), which limits effective collaboration.
aimThis study aimed to develop and validate interprofessional activity guidelines that align with core interprofessional competencies and support the implementation of a rehabilitation model at the PHC level in South Africa.
settingThe study was conducted remotely with geographically diverse experts but remained grounded in the South African PHC context. It focused specifically on the Western Cape Department of Health.
methodsA two-round Delphi technique was used to gather expert consensus. In Round One, 15 experts identified 26 interprofessional activity guidelines aligned with the 5 phases of an existing PHC rehabilitation model. In Round Two, 11 experts evaluated the guidelines for consensus and convergence. A consensus threshold of 70% agreement and a convergence threshold of a median score above 3.24 were used.
resultsOf the 26 guidelines, 25 achieved the required 70% consensus. One guideline, which did not reach the consensus percentage, was retained based on a median score above 3.24, indicating convergence of expert opinion. All guidelines were mapped to the four IPE core competencies.
conclusionThis study presents validated interprofessional activity guidelines to enhance rehabilitation services at the PHC level. Aligned with core competencies, these guidelines support practical implementation through a phased approach, with readiness assessments and ongoing evaluation recommended. The Delphi-informed process may be adapted for similar resource-limited health systems.Contribution: The results from this study provides validated activity guidelines that translate a South African health policy vision into actionable steps for IPP in the rehabilitation sector at the PHC level. The guidelines strengthen teamwork, communication and patient-centred care across disciplines, offering a replicable model for improving coordination and service delivery in African PHC contexts.
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.