ArticleBMC health services research2026
Access to pulmonary rehabilitation in real-world territorial care: the APTA friendly network as a structural and organizational model.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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
backgroundPulmonary rehabilitation represents a cornerstone of chronic respiratory disease management, supported by robust evidence demonstrating improvements in functional capacity, symptoms and health-related quality of life. Nevertheless, its implementation in real-world territorial respiratory care remains limited and highly heterogeneous, suggesting the presence of systemic and organizational barriers beyond clinical efficacy.
methodsThis mixed-methods, expert-based study combined structured expert discussion and targeted survey data collection among pulmonologists actively involved in community-based respiratory care within the regional healthcare system of Campania, Italy. The initiative was conducted within the framework of the Associazione Pneumologi Territoriali Ambulatoriali (APTA), a professional network representing territorial and outpatient pulmonologists, with the aim of capturing real-world implementation challenges in pulmonary rehabilitation delivery. Qualitative and quantitative findings were integrated through thematic triangulation to inform an implementation-oriented analytical framework.
resultsOrganizational barriers to pulmonary rehabilitation were consistently reported across districts in the Campania Region. Approximately two thirds of respondents identified long waiting times and limited short-term availability as major obstacles to access, while around half reported administrative and bureaucratic constraints as key determinants of delayed rehabilitation activation. Marked inter-district heterogeneity in access pathways emerged independently of clinical need, and domiciliary rehabilitation was frequently perceived as suboptimal because of limited respiratory-specific expertise and lack of outcome monitoring. More than half of respondents expressed skepticism toward telemedicine-supported rehabilitation when implemented outside structured care pathways.
conclusionsThese findings should be read as implementation-informed insights rather than definitive evidence of system performance. Within these limits, the observed barriers appear predominantly organizational, pointing to the need for integrated care networks and standardized access pathways. Although derived from a specific professional and regional context, the proposed framework may be applicable to other healthcare systems facing similar challenges in translating evidence-based pulmonary rehabilitation into routine practice.
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.