↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of clinical guidelines on diabetes and hypertension in urban Mongolia: a qualitative study of primary care providers’ perspectives and experiences

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
146 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
Implementation of clinical guidelines on diabetes and hypertension in urban Mongolia: a qualitative study of primary care providers’ perspectives and experiences
Published in
Implementation Science, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0307-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oyun Chimeddamba, Anna Peeters, Darshini Ayton, Enkhjargal Tumenjargal, Sonin Sodov, Catherine Joyce

Abstract

Hypertension and diabetes, key risk factors for cardiovascular disease, are significant health problems globally. As cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of mortality in Mongolia since 2000, clinical guidelines on arterial hypertension and diabetes were developed and implemented in 2011. This paper explores the barriers and enablers influencing the implementation of these guidelines in the primary care setting. A phenomenological qualitative study with semi-structured interviews was conducted to explore the implementation of the diabetes and hypertension guidelines at the primary care level, as well as to gain insight into how practitioners view the usability and practicality of the guidelines. Ten family health centres were randomly chosen from a list of all the family health centres (n = 136) located in Ulaanbaatar City. In each centre, a focus group discussion with nurses (n = 20) and individual interviews with practice doctors (n = 10) and practice managers (n = 10) were conducted. Data was analysed using a thematic approach utilising the Theoretical Domains Framework. The majority of the study participants reported being aware of the guidelines and that they had incorporated them into their daily practice. They also reported having attended guideline training sessions which were focused on practice skill development. The majority of participants expressed satisfaction with the wide range of resources that had been supplied to them by the Mongolian Government to assist with the implementation of the guidelines. The resources, supplied from 2011 onwards, included screening devices, equipment for blood tests, medications and educational materials. Other enablers were the participants' commitment and passion for guideline implementation and their belief in the simplicity and practicality of the guidelines. Primary care providers reported a number of challenges in implementing the guidelines, including frustration caused by increased workload and long waiting times, time constraints, difficulties with conflicting tasks and low patient health literacy. This study provides evidence that comprehensive and rigorous dissemination and implementation strategies increase the likelihood of successful implementation of new guidelines in low resource primary care settings. It also offers some key lessons that might be carefully considered when other evidence-based clinical guidelines are to be put into effect in low resource settings and elsewhere.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Peru 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 142 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 14%
Student > Master 21 14%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 38 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Psychology 6 4%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 47 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,756,764
of 23,322,966 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,418
of 1,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,092
of 265,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#36
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,966 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 265,493 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.