ArticleBMJ open2026
Implementation of a comprehensive template to support personalised care for people with multiple long-term conditions: a mixed-methods evaluation in primary care.
Article in BMJ open, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare services are mainly organised around single health conditions and need reconfiguration to meet the needs of people with multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity). Typically, people are offered annual reviews for each of their long-term conditions separately. In a randomised controlled trial, a comprehensive computerised template based on a personalised care model increased the person-centredness of multimorbidity reviews in primary care, but there were implementation challenges. We sought to understand and address the challenges of implementing a template to support personalised primary care for people with multimorbidity (PP4M).
objectivesTo explore the extent of implementation and factors influencing uptake of the PP4M intervention. To understand factors influencing implementation and normalisation of the template.
designConvergent parallel mixed methods within a non-randomised hybrid implementation-effectiveness study. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) informed design, data collection and analysis.
settingPrimary care (general practices) in three English regions.
participantsQuantitative: Patients aged 18 years or over and had at least three types of long-term conditions (routine data collection); staff involved in using the template in implementation practices (Normalisation MeAsure Development (NoMAD) questionnaire).Qualitative: Staff at implementation practices.
interventionA multimorbidity computerised template to support personalised annual reviews. NPT-informed implementation package delivered to implementation practices included: process mapping, software support and training. DATA COLLECTION: Routine medical record data; NoMAD questionnaires and qualitative interviews in implementation practices. PRIMARY/SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Measures of reach, fidelity, acceptability and sustainability. ANALYSIS: Quantitative data: descriptive statistics, logistic regression and difference-in-difference models. Qualitative data analysis conducted using NPT coding manual.
resultsIn practices that received an NPT-informed implementation package, use of the template increased more, across patients with a range of demographics and health conditions, than in those that did not receive the implementation package (OR 2.86 (95% CI 2.34 to 3.49)). The implementation package successfully triggered NPT processes of coherence and cognitive participation, and, to a lesser extent, collective action and reflexive monitoring. Contextual factors, including a lack of staff generalist skills and disease-specific incentives, impeded engagement and sustained implementation.
conclusionsFocusing on the processes of normalisation as mechanisms of implementation facilitated development of an implementation strategy with potential to trigger those mechanisms, but did not sufficiently address contextual factors. Implementation strategies to support personalised care must consider wider system and practice level contextual factors, such as incentives and staff training. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN40295449 (2022-08-03, retrospectively registered.).
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.