Opinion leaders in the medical community attract more attention than randomized controlled trials in shoulder surgery

Torrens, Carlos; Santana, Fernando; Miquel, Joan

doi:10.1007/s00264-020-04775-8

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As concluded by Torrens et al [49], we found that in orthopedic surgery the medical community pays more attention to opinion leader studies than to randomized controlled trials. Local opinion leaders are effective in promoting evidence-based practice, participating in teaching programs, distributing educational materials, and regularly organize meetings with colleagues.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…The adoption of patient-centered care can be achieved by clinicians if they address three essential elements: partnership, communication, and health promotion [48]. The medical staff active in orthopedic surgery prefer studies conducted by opinion leaders to randomized controlled trials [49]. Flodgren et al [50] show that local opinion leaders can be effective in promoting evidence-based practice.…”

Section: Practices For Evaluation Of Medical Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities

Moldovan,

Moldovan

2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: Ensuring the sustainability of healthcare facilities requires the evaluation of patient matters with appropriate methods and tools. The objective of this research is to develop a new tool for assessing patient matters as a component of social responsibility requirements that contribute to the sustainability of healthcare facilities. Materials and Methods: We carried out an analytical observational study in which, starting from the domains of the reference framework for the sustainability of health facilities (economic, environmental, social, provision of sustainable medical care services and management processes), we designed indicators that describe patient matters. To achieve this, we extracted from the scientific literature the most recent data and aspects related to patient matters that have been reported by representative hospitals from all over the world. These were organized into the four sequences of the quality cycle. We designed the method of evaluating the indicators based on the information couple achievement degree-importance of the indicator. In the experimental part of the study, we validated the indicators for the evaluation of patient matters and the evaluation method at an emergency hospital with an orthopedic profile. Results: We developed the patient matters indicator matrix, the content of the 8 indicators that make it up, questions for the evaluation of the indicators, and the evaluation grids of the indicators. They describe five levels for each variable of the achievement degree-importance couple. The practical testing of the indicators at the emergency hospital allowed the calculation of sustainability indicators and the development of a prioritization matrix for improvement measures. Conclusions: Indicators designed in this research cover social responsibility requirements that describe patient matters. They are compatible and can be used by health facilities along with other implemented national and international requirements. Their added value consists in promoting social responsibility and sustainable development of healthcare facilities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Practices For Evaluation Of Medical Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities

Moldovan,

Moldovan

2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is concluded that viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid injections is a viable alternative [ 51 ]. Torrens et al [ 52 ] are of the opinion that in shoulder surgery, opinion leaders from the orthopedic medical community are more influential compared to randomized controlled trials, even if they have results published in journals with a high impact factor.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Orthopedic Healthcare Facility Governance Assessed with a New Indicator System

Moldovan,

Moldovan

2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: A sustainability-oriented hospital governance has the potential to increase the efficiency of healthcare services and reduce the volume of expenses. The objective of this research is to develop a new complex tool for evaluating healthcare facility governance as a component of social responsibility, integrated into sustainability. Materials and Methods: We designed the research to develop the domains of a new reference framework for evaluating healthcare facility governance. The methodology for designing the indicators that make up the new reference framework consists of collecting and processing the most recent and relevant practices regarding the governance of healthcare facilities that have been reported by representative hospitals around the world. Results: We designed eight indicators that are brought together in the healthcare facility governance indicators matrix. They have descriptions and qualitative and quantitative rating scales with values from 0 to 5 that allow the degree of fulfillment to be quantified. The importance of the indicators is evaluated on a specific scale described qualitatively and quantitatively by values from 0 to 5. The values of the degree of achievement–importance couples of the indicators allow the development of improvement measures with priority according to the results revealed by the Eisenhower-type assessment diagram. Conclusions: Validation in practice of the system of indicators at an emergency hospital in an orthopedic profile highlighted the fact that they can be integrated into other national and international reference frameworks implemented in the hospital. The added value of the implementation consists of the facilitation of sustainable development and the orientation of health personnel, patients, and interested parties toward sustainability.

show abstract

Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study

Hennrich

Arnold

Traulsen

et al. 2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Healthcare providers’ inclination to seek or lead other providers’ opinions on clinical topics may influence healthcare practices, particularly regarding their alignment across different providers in controversial domains. This study aimed to explore opinion-seeking behaviours of general practitioners and their impacts on clinical opinions in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany. Methods Between 2019 and 2021, we performed a written survey in two samples of general practitioners and one sample of self-employed cardiologists in three German states. The general practitioners were asked to identify a person they deemed influential on their views on cardiovascular conditions. Their self-perceived opinion leadership and opinion seeking behaviours were then measured, using a validated 12-item-questionnaire. General practitioners and cardiologists were requested to indicate their agreement with three potentially controversial aspects of cardiovascular ambulatory care. Potential impacts on the general practitioners’ views, including local cardiologists’ opinions, were examined using multi-level linear regression models. Results A total of 129 general practitioners and 113 cardiologists returned the questionnaire. 68.50% of general practitioners named an opinion leader, mainly cardiologists outside of their practice. General practitioners perceived themselves as opinion seeking and as opinion leading at the same time. Views on the presented controversial topics were mixed among both general practitioners and cardiologists. Self-reported opinion leadership behaviour of general practitioners was associated with their views on one of the three topics. No such associations were found for opinion seeking behaviours and the views of local cardiologists. Conclusion While most general practitioners named a cardiovascular opinion leader and saw themselves as opinion seeking regarding cardiovascular issues, they simultaneously perceived themselves as opinion leading, suggesting that opinion leadership and opinion seeking are not mutually exclusive concepts. The views of local cardiologists were not associated with the general practitioners’ view, suggesting that local medical specialists do not necessarily influence the surrounding opinion seekers’ views per se. Trial registration: We registered the study prospectively on 7 November 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de) under ID no. DRKS00019219.

show abstract

Opinion leaders in the medical community attract more attention than randomized controlled trials in shoulder surgery

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities

Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities

An Orthopedic Healthcare Facility Governance Assessed with a New Indicator System

Opinion seeking behaviour of healthcare providers in ambulatory cardiovascular care in Germany: a cross-sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About