Trial reportBMJ open2025
A qualitative enquiry into participants' and practitioners' experiences in the Australian Liver FaIlurE trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian Liver FaIlurE (ALFIE) trial, a multicentre, randomised controlled trial, assessed the efficacy of a nurse-coordinated model of care to reduce liver-related emergency admissions (LREAs) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. The model of care was delivered by a specialist nurse, including intensive postdischarge monitoring, linkage to multidisciplinary care, rapid access to care pathway, enhanced education and self-management support.
objectiveTo examine the experiences of participants and practitioners in the ALFIE trial to understand its impact, barriers and areas for improvement. DESIGN AND
settingA qualitative semistructured interview analysis nested within the ALFIE trial.
participantsA purposeful sample of 15 patients, 14 controls and 12 staff.
interventionThematic analysis of interview transcripts.
resultsInterventional participants and the nurses perceived the care provided as personalised, holistic and continuous. The intervention enabled the development of robust therapeutic relationships and trust that promoted participant engagement and risk factor modification. It helped intervention participants navigate the busy hospital system. The control participants desired more education and a personal contact to deal with emergencies. With respect to the intervention, nurses felt that their support helped reduce LREAs and improve care, but it was overwhelming. A number of barriers and systemic issues were identified. Suggestions for improvement of the intervention model included increased staffing, improved mental health support and communication pathways with primary care practitioners.
conclusionsThe ALFIE trial was well received by nurses and participants. It met the needs of intervention participants and the health system through easy-to-navigate, personalised, holistic and ongoing care. The study identified barriers and systemic improvement areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617001293358.
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.