Key result
General practitioners with access to a specialist chronic heart failure nurse attached significantly more importance to the service than those without access (p = 0.003).
Why the study?
What are the views and knowledge of general practitioners regarding chronic heart failure treatments and services in light of the new GMS contract?
Cross-Sectional (n=380)
What are the views and knowledge of general practitioners regarding chronic heart failure treatments and services in light of the new GMS contract?
p-value: p=0.003
Reading national guidelines may not be the key factor in determining GP knowledge of evidence-based CHF treatments, whereas specialist CHF nurse services are highly valued by those who have access to them.
Authors
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Access to specialist CHF nurses was associated with higher GP valuation; leaves open whether expanded services improve integration or reflect selection.
Leslie et al. (2005) conducted a cross-sectional in Chronic heart failure management (n=380). Access to a specialist CHF nurse vs. No access to a specialist CHF nurse was evaluated on Importance attached to a specialist CHF nurse service (p=0.003). General practitioners with access to a specialist chronic heart failure nurse attached significantly more importance to the service than those without access (p = 0.003).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: