Trial reportBMC health services research2026
Process evaluation of a nurse-led transitional care model (Cardiolotse) within a randomized controlled trial aiming to improve care coordination for patients with cardiovascular diseases in Germany.
Trial report 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with higher age suffering from cardiovascular disease discharged from hospital are at greater risk of readmission within 30 days. We evaluated an innovative care program providing post-discharge support and helping patients to navigate through the healthcare system. This paper reports the findings of the process evaluation of the randomized controlled trial Cardiolotse, a nurse-led transitional care model improving care coordination for patients with cardiovascular diseases in Germany.
methodsA process evaluation, following the guidelines of the Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework, was performed. Semi-structured interviews with all relevant target groups were conducted to gain more insight about implementation processes. Questionnaires and medical records were used to explore mechanisms of impact and understand how change was produced in the intervention. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis with deductive and inductive categories. Descriptive statistics and subgroup analyses were utilized to explore quantitative data.
resultsOverall, the designed training programme was perceived positively by the study nurses, so called Cardiolotsen (CLs). Patients receiving support by the CLs reported positive satisfaction ratings. Interactions between CLs and patients were reported as trustworthy and reliable. A total of approximately 12,500 contacts were made over the course of the intervention. However, changes in satisfaction scores between intervention and control groups in terms of medical treatment or the interaction between medical health providers involved in the treatment could not be determined. Furthermore, data suggested reach issues with respect to office-based physicians, as regular CL contact could not be achieved with 90% of the participating general practitioners and cardiologists.
conclusionsThe CLs served as an important source of support for the participating patients throughout the intervention. At regular intervals, they checked a patient's health status and their adherence to therapies after discharge. However, the process evaluation identified cross-sectoral communication and information exchange between CLs and office-based physicians as an implementation challenge.
trial registrationThe study was retrospectively registered at German Clinical Trial Register, http://www.drks.de/DRKS00020424 (Trial Registration Number DRKS00020424) on 18 June 2020.
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.