↓ Skip to main content

Operational integration in primary health care: patient encounters and workflows

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Operational integration in primary health care: patient encounters and workflows
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2702-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dimitra Sifaki-Pistolla, Vasiliki-Eirini Chatzea, Adelais Markaki, Kyriakos Kritikos, Elena Petelos, Christos Lionis

Abstract

Despite several countrywide attempts to strengthen and standardise the primary healthcare (PHC) system, Greece is still lacking a sustainable, policy-based model of integrated services. The aim of our study was to identify operational integration levels through existing patient care pathways and to recommend an alternative PHC model for optimum integration. The study was part of a large state-funded project, which included 22 randomly selected PHC units located across two health regions of Greece. Dimensions of operational integration in PHC were selected based on the work of Kringos and colleagues. A five-point Likert-type scale, coupled with an algorithm, was used to capture and transform theoretical framework features into measurable attributes. PHC services were grouped under the main categories of chronic care, urgent/acute care, preventive care, and home care. A web-based platform was used to assess patient pathways, evaluate integration levels and propose improvement actions. Analysis relied on a comparison of actual pathways versus optimal, the latter ones having been identified through literature review. Overall integration varied among units. The majority (57%) of units corresponded to a basic level. Integration by type of PHC service ranged as follows: basic (86%) or poor (14%) for chronic care units, poor (78%) or basic (22%) for urgent/acute care units, basic (50%) for preventive care units, and partial or basic (50%) for home care units. The actual pathways across all four categories of PHC services differed from those captured in the optimum integration model. Certain similarities were observed in the operational flows between chronic care management and urgent/acute care management. Such similarities were present at the highest level of abstraction, but also in common steps along the operational flows. Existing patient care pathways were mapped and analysed, and recommendations for an optimum integration PHC model were made. The developed web platform, based on a strong theoretical framework, can serve as a robust integration evaluation tool. This could be a first step towards restructuring and improving PHC services within a financially restrained environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 30 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Social Sciences 12 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 39 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2021.
All research outputs
#7,403,274
of 23,896,578 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,626
of 8,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,848
of 444,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#58
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,896,578 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.