Trial reportBMC primary care2025
Health information management of older, multimorbid patients in German primary care: feasibility and first results of the outcome measures of a cluster-randomised controlled pilot trial - HYPERION-TransCare.
Trial report in BMC primary care, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAvailability of information at the interface of outpatient and inpatient care remains an important and inadequately resolved issue in Germany and beyond. As a vulnerable group with complex care needs, older patients, mostly multimorbid, are especially affected by the consequences. This trial tested the feasibility and implementability of a complex intervention which aimed at improving the availability of health information among patients and different healthcare providers.
methodsThe prospective two-arm blinded pilot cRCT was accompanied by an explorative mixed-methods process evaluation. Over a period of six months in 2022, general practitioner (GP) practices in Germany with patients (≥ 65, multimorbid, polypharmacy) participated in testing the implementation of the intervention and the trial design (intervention (IG) vs control group (CG)). Here, the focus is on the feasibility and exploratory results of the primary (combined endpoint of hospitalisation, falls and mortality) and secondary outcome measures (improving GP practices' and patients' knowledge of health-related resource use (FIMA), as well as improving patients' Health Literacy (HLQ-G) and Satisfaction with Medication Information (SIMS-D)). Data were analysed according to the intention to treat principle.
resultsTwelve GP practices were randomised (6 per IG/CG). Of 159 patients invited, 93 were included in the analyses (52 IG/41 CG). At t0 and t1, only few self-reported data from patients (5 resp. 10) or from the GP questionnaire (resp. 0) were missing. At least one survey perspective was available for each patient at both survey times. Overall, there were few missing items in the questionnaires, so the scores could not be calculated in 4-18% of cases (primary combined endpoint 9%), and there were no single items with increased missing values (n = 0 to 7). The concordance of the hospitalisation data from patients and GP practices was about 80%. Exploratory analyses showed no effects of the intervention on primary or secondary outcome measures.
conclusionsThe primary combined endpoint was feasible. The secondary outcomes and survey methods used also proved feasible for GP practices and older multimorbid patients, with low missing rates. However, there was no hint of the influence of the intervention in the study groups in the explorative analyses.
trial registrationThe trial was registered in the DRKS German Clinical Trials Register: registration number DRKS00027649 (date: 19.01.2022); http://www.drks.de/DRKS00027649 .
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.