ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention2026
Barriers and facilitators for the uptake of the national INOCA recommendation among Dutch cardiologists: A survey study.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In 2020, the Dutch Society for Cardiologists (NVVC) published a national recommendation for diagnostics and treatment of Ischaemia with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries (INOCA), a historically underrecognized condition. In this study we identify determinants of implementation of the NVVC INOCA recommendation through a national survey among Dutch cardiologists. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional, nationwide online survey among Dutch cardiologists, incorporating attitudinal statements derived from prior qualitative research and the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovation (MIDI) questionnaire. Descriptive analyses were used to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation. Multiple regression analyses examined associations between attitudinal factors and familiarity with the recommendation. Results: A total of 134 cardiologists participated in this study with 78 (58%) completing the long version of the questionnaire and 56 (42%) the short version. Facilitators for implementation were predominantly user-related, driven by positive outcome expectations, perceptions of professional responsibility, and perceived communicative capabilities. In contrast, key barriers were primarily organizational, including the absence of institutional policies, implementation coordination, and performance feedback. Familiarity with the recommendation was independently associated with perceived improvements in INOCA-related knowledge, confidence in communicating under clinical uncertainty, and gender. Conclusions: Uptake of the NVVC INOCA recommendation among Dutch cardiologists is largely motivated by individual professional commitment and positive outcome expectations but is constrained by limited organizational support. Strengthening institutional implementation structures and reinforcing professional communicative capabilities may help translate high individual motivation into consistent peer-dissemination and recommendation-concordant INOCA care.
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.