ArticleBMC health services research2026
A qualitative study exploring a community health navigator intervention for patients with chronic and complex care needs transitioning from hospital to home.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCommunity Health Navigators (CHNs) can promote healthcare access and care coordination. However, little is known about the experiences of stakeholders when CHNs are embedded within a multidisciplinary care team setting. The CHN role aimed to improve the transition from acute care to home for patients with chronic conditions, through linkage to general practitioners, other professional follow-up, and social and community supports.
methodsThree CHNs were employed and located in an Aged Health, Rehabilitation and Chronic Care outreach team in Sydney, Australia. This qualitative study aimed to explore the perceptions of patients, healthcare professionals (HCPs), and CHNs about the support provided, and to determine what factors supported or impeded the CHN role in this setting to inform implementation in the Australian context.
resultsTwenty semi-structured interviews with twelve patients, five HCPs and three CHNs were analysed inductively using interpretive thematic analysis. Three key themes were constructed: operationalising CHN integration into the team setting; contributions to support the needs of patients post-hospitalisation; and, experiencing the emerging navigation role. Timely emotional, informational, and practical support provided during the transition period were highlighted. The healthcare team viewed the CHN as valuable to support patients non-clinical needs and patient management. The interface between the clinical focus of the team and the non-clinical nature of the role was challenging. Supportive supervision was essential to support knowledge, problem solving, and to promote acceptance within the team.
conclusionsThe findings suggest CHN roles can offer a ‘safety net’ for transitioning patients. Integrating this role within a complex clinical care setting requires time, organisational commitment, and policy and guidelines to address the interface with other professional healthcare roles. Promotion to patients, clinicians, and other service providers is required to improve awareness of the CHN role. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Trial registration number: ACTRN12622000659707. Date of registration: 5 May 2022.
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.