ArticleBMC geriatrics2021
Barriers and facilitators for implementation of a complex health services intervention in long-term care homes: a qualitative study using focus groups.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a complex health services intervention in long-term care nursing homes on 3-year overall survival: results from the CoCare study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Evaluation and management of urinary incontinence in nursing home residents: unique considerations for an at-risk population.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2024Review
- Emergency physicians' and nurses' perception on the adequacy of emergency calls for nursing home residents: a non-interventional prospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- The practice environment of primary care nurses: A cross-sectional study of five health care districts in San Paulo, Brazil.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2023Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of the CoCare intervention to improve medical care in long-term care nursing homes: an analysis based on claims data.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- Barriers to providing internet-based home care services for urban older adults in China: a qualitative study of the service providers.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Frailty nurse and GP-led models of care in care homes: the role of contextual factors impacting Enhanced health in care homes framework implementation.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- [Nursing home-sensitive conditions and approaches to reduce hospitalization of nursing home residents].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Article
- Prepared to Accompany the End of Life during Pandemics in Nursing Homes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Qualitative Insights on Preventive Group Training in LTC Facilities: Key Influencing Factors.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith rising numbers of elderly people living in nursing homes in Germany, the need for on-site primary care is increasing. A lack of primary care in nursing homes can lead to unnecessary hospitalization, higher mortality, and morbidity in the elderly. The project CoCare ("coordinated medical care") has therefore implemented a complex health intervention in nursing homes, using inter alia, regular medical rounds, a shared patient medical record and medication checks, with the aim of improving the coordination of medical care. This study reports upon the results of a qualitative study assessing the perceived barriers and facilitators of the implementation of CoCare by stakeholders.
methodsFocus group interviews were held between October 2018 and November 2019 with nurses, general practitioners and GP's assistants working or consulting in a participating nursing home. A semi-structured modular guideline was used to ask participants for their opinion on different aspects of CoCare and which barriers and facilitators they perceived. Focus groups were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsIn total, N = 11 focus group interviews with N = 74 participants were conducted. We found six themes describing barriers and facilitators in respect of the implementation of CoCare: understaffing, bureaucracy, complexity, structural barriers, financial compensation, communication and collaboration. Furthermore, participants described the incorporation of the intervention into standard care.
conclusionBarriers perceived by stakeholders are well known in the literature (e.g. understaffing and complexity). However, CoCare provides a good structure to overcome barriers and some barriers will dissolve after implementation into routine care (e.g. bureaucracy). In contrast, especially communication and collaboration were perceived as facilitators in CoCare, with the project being received as a team building intervention itself.
trial registrationWHO UTN: U1111-1196-6611; DRKS-ID: DRKS00012703 (Date of Registration in DRKS: 2017 Aug 23).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.