↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Enablers and Barriers to Implementing ICU Follow-Up Clinics and Peer Support Groups Following Critical Illness

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care Medicine, June 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
137 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Enablers and Barriers to Implementing ICU Follow-Up Clinics and Peer Support Groups Following Critical Illness
Published in
Critical Care Medicine, June 2019
DOI 10.1097/ccm.0000000000003818
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberley J. Haines, Joanne McPeake, Elizabeth Hibbert, Leanne M. Boehm, Krishna Aparanji, Rita N. Bakhru, Anthony J. Bastin, Sarah J. Beesley, Lynne Beveridge, Brad W. Butcher, Kelly Drumright, Tammy L. Eaton, Thomas Farley, Penelope Firshman, Andrew Fritschle, Clare Holdsworth, Aluko A. Hope, Annie Johnson, Michael T. Kenes, Babar A. Khan, Janet A. Kloos, Erin K. Kross, Pamela Mactavish, Joel Meyer, Ashley Montgomery-Yates, Tara Quasim, Howard L. Saft, Andrew Slack, Joanna Stollings, Gerald Weinhouse, Jessica Whitten, Giora Netzer, Ramona O. Hopkins, Mark E. Mikkelsen, Theodore J. Iwashyna, Carla M. Sevin

Abstract

Data are lacking regarding implementation of novel strategies such as follow-up clinics and peer support groups, to reduce the burden of postintensive care syndrome. We sought to discover enablers that helped hospital-based clinicians establish post-ICU clinics and peer support programs, and identify barriers that challenged them. Qualitative inquiry. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to organize and analyze data. Two learning collaboratives (ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups), representing 21 sites, across three continents. Clinicians from 21 sites. Ten enablers and nine barriers to implementation of "ICU follow-up clinics" were described. A key enabler to generate support for clinics was providing insight into the human experience of survivorship, to obtain interest from hospital administrators. Significant barriers included patient and family lack of access to clinics and clinic funding. Nine enablers and five barriers to the implementation of "peer support groups" were identified. Key enablers included developing infrastructure to support successful operationalization of this complex intervention, flexibility about when peer support should be offered, belonging to the international learning collaborative. Significant barriers related to limited attendance by patients and families due to challenges in creating awareness, and uncertainty about who might be appropriate to attend and target in advertising. Several enablers and barriers to implementing ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups should be taken into account and leveraged to improve ICU recovery. Among the most important enablers are motivated clinician leaders who persist to find a path forward despite obstacles.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 137 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 40%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Unspecified 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 40%
Unspecified 4 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 20%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 88. 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 11 October 2019.
All research outputs
#190,436
of 13,635,851 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care Medicine
#77
of 7,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,391
of 249,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care Medicine
#3
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,635,851 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 249,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.