The effectiveness of a nurse-led illness perception intervention in COPD patients: a cluster randomised trial in primary care

Weldam, Saskia; Schuurmans, Marieke J.; Zanen, Pieter; Heijmans, Monique; Sachs, A. P. E.; Lammers, Jan Willem J.

doi:10.1183/23120541.00115-2016

Cited by 26 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Notably, the retrieved studies originated from a few different studies, and most of them were conducted in the Netherlands [37][38][39][40][41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One main project report was a RCT [35] andsix were cluster RCTs (cRCTs) [36][37][38][39][40][41]. Two included nested process evaluation components in the main report [36,37] and for ve additional process evaluation reports were published separately.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies were published between 2008 and 2017 and took place in PC settings in three different countries: ve in the Netherlands [37][38][39][40][41], one in the UK [36] and one in Canada [35].…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All projects compared CPWs with usual care to assess their effectiveness. Three projects tested a CPW for persons with speci c health conditions, which were type 2 diabetes [37], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [40], and heart failure [35]. The other projects targeted on community-dwelling people [36,38,39,41].…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five projects used patient-relevant primary outcomes, such as disability [38], daily functioning [39], functional performance in activities of daily living and mental well-being [41], quality of life and functional capacity for older females living with heart failure [35] and health status of COPD patients [40]. Two studies investigated surrogate endpoints, such as changes in average daily step count [36] and the percentage of people with poor glycaemic control [37].…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of multi-disciplinary care pathways in primary care: a systematic review

Seckler

Regauer

Rotter

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background : Care pathways (CPWs) are complex interventions that have the potential to reduce treatment errors and optimize patient outcomes by translating evidence into local practice. To design an optimal implementation strategy, potential barriers to and facilitators of implementation must be considered. The objective of this systematic review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of CPWs in primary care (PC). Methods : A systematic search via Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and MEDLINE via PubMed supplemented by hand searches and citation tracing was carried out. We considered articles reporting on CPWs targeting patients at least 65 years of age in outpatient settings that were written in the English or German language and were published between 2007 and 2019. We considered (non-)randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies ( main project reports ) as well as associated process evaluation reports of either methodology. Two independent researchers performed the study selection; the data extraction and critical appraisal were duplicated until the point of perfect agreement between the two reviewers. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, a narrative synthesis was performed. Results : 14 studies (seven main project reports and seven process evaluation reports) of the identified 8,154 records in the search update were included in the synthesis. The structure and content of the interventions as well as the quality of evidence of the studies varied. The identified barriers and facilitators were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework . The identified barriers were inadequate staffing, insufficient education, lack of financial compensation, low motivation and lack of time. Adequate skills and knowledge through training activities for health professionals, good multi-disciplinary communication and individual tailored interventions were identified as facilitators. Conclusions : In the implementation of CPWs in PC, a multitude of barriers and facilitators must be considered, and most of them can be modified through the careful design of intervention and implementation strategies. Furthermore, process evaluations must become a standard component of implementing CPWs to enable other projects to build upon previous experience. Trial registration : PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018087689

show abstract

“…Notably, the retrieved studies originated from a few different studies, and most of them were conducted in the Netherlands [37][38][39][40][41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%