Improving preventive service delivery at adult complete health check-ups: the Preventive health Evidence-based Recommendation Form (PERFORM) cluster randomized controlled trial

Effect of GP visits in the compliance of preventive services: a cross-sectional study in Europe

BACKGROUND

Performing cardiovascular and cancer screenings in target populations can reduce mortality. Visiting a General Practitioner (GP) once a year is related to an increased likelihood of preventive care. The aim of this study was to analyse the influence of visiting a GP in the last year on the delivery of preventive services based on sex and household income.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study using data collected from the European Health Interview Survey 2013-2015 of individuals aged 40-74 years from 29 European countries. The variables included: sociodemographic factors (age, sex, and household income (HHI) quintiles [HHI 1: lowest income, HHI 5: more affluent]), lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and preventive care services (cardiometabolic, influenza vaccination, and cancer screening). Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses and multilevel models (level 1: citizen, level 2: country) were performed.

RESULTS

242,212 subjects were included, 53.7% were female. The proportion of subjects who received any cardiometabolic screening (92.4%) was greater than cancer screening (colorectal cancer: 44.1%, gynaecologic cancer: 40.0%) and influenza vaccination. Individuals who visited a GP in the last year were more prone to receive preventive care services (cardiometabolic screening: adjusted OR (aOR): 7.78, 95% CI: 7.43-8.15; colorectal screening aOR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.80-1.95; mammography aOR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.69-1.83 and Pap smear test: aOR: 1.89, 95% CI:1.85-1.94). Among those who visited a GP in the last year, the highest ratios of cardiometabolic screening and cancer screening benefited those who were more affluent. Women underwent more blood pressure measurements than men regardless of the HHI. Men were more likely to undergo influenza vaccination than women regardless of the HHI. The highest differences between countries were observed for influenza vaccination, with a median odds ratio (MOR) of 6.36 (under 65 years with comorbidities) and 4.30 (over 65 years with comorbidities), followed by colorectal cancer screening with an MOR of 2.26.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater adherence to preventive services was linked to individuals who had visited a GP at least once in the past year. Disparities were evident among those with lower household incomes who visited a GP. The most significant variability among countries was observed in influenza vaccination and colorectal cancer screening.

Effectiveness of educational interventions for healthcare workers on vaccination dialogue with older adults: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCW) significantly influence older adults' vaccine acceptance. This systematic review aimed to identify effective educational interventions for HCWs that could enhance their ability to engage in a dialogue with older adults on vaccination.

METHODS

Medline, Scopus, Cochrane library and grey literature were searched for comparative studies investigating educational interventions concerning older adult vaccinations. The search encompassed all languages and publication years. Analysis was performed on the outcomes 'vaccines offered or ordered' and 'vaccination rates'. Whenever feasible, a sub-analysis on publication year was conducted. Methodological limitations were assessed using the RoB 2 for RCTs and the GRADE checklist for non-randomized studies. Study outcomes were categorized according to the four-level Kirkpatrick model (1996) for effectiveness: reaction, learning, behaviour, and results.

RESULTS

In total, 48 studies met all inclusion criteria. Most studies included reminder systems signalling HCWs on patients due for vaccination. Other interventions included seminars, academic detailing and peer-comparison feedback. Four articles reporting on the reaction-level indicated that most HCWs had a favourable view of the intervention. Two of the six articles reporting on the learning-level observed positive changes in attitude or knowledge due to the intervention. Seventeen studies reported on the behaviour-level. An analysis on eleven out of seventeen studies focusing on vaccines 'ordered' or 'offered' outcomes suggested that tailored reminders, particularly those implemented before 2000, were the most effective. Out of 34 studies reporting on the result-level, 24 were eligible for analysis on the outcome 'vaccination rate', which showed that compared to usual care, multicomponent interventions were the most effective, followed by tailored reminders, especially those predating 2000. Nonetheless, tailored reminders often fell short compared to other interventions like standing orders or patient reminders. In both the behaviour-level and result-level 'education only' interventions frequently underperformed relative to other interventions. Seventeen out of the 27 RCTs, and seven of the 21 non-randomized studies presented a low-to-medium risk for bias in the studies' findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored reminders and multicomponent interventions effectively assist HCWs in addressing vaccines with older adults. However, education-only interventions appear to be less effective compared to other interventions rates, attitude, knowledge.

The Association Between Social Determinants of Health and Population Health Outcomes: Ecological Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the increased availability of data, a growing number of studies have been conducted to address the impact of social determinants of health (SDOH) factors on population health outcomes. However, such an impact is either examined at the county level or the state level in the United States. The results of analysis at lower administrative levels would be useful for local policy makers to make informed health policy decisions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the ecological association between SDOH factors and population health outcomes at the census tract level and the city level. The findings of this study can be applied to support local policy makers in efforts to improve population health, enhance the quality of care, and reduce health inequity.

METHODS

This ecological analysis was conducted based on 29,126 census tracts in 499 cities across all 50 states in the United States. These cities were grouped into 5 categories based on their population density and political affiliation. Feature selection was applied to reduce the number of SDOH variables from 148 to 9. A linear mixed-effects model was then applied to account for the fixed effect and random effects of SDOH variables at both the census tract level and the city level.

RESULTS

The finding reveals that all 9 selected SDOH variables had a statistically significant impact on population health outcomes for ≥2 city groups classified by population density and political affiliation; however, the magnitude of the impact varied among the different groups. The results also show that 4 SDOH risk factors, namely, asthma, kidney disease, smoking, and food stamps, significantly affect population health outcomes in all groups (P<.01 or P<.001). The group differences in health outcomes for the 4 factors were further assessed using a predictive margin analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis reveals that population density and political affiliation are effective delineations for separating how the SDOH affects health outcomes. In addition, different SDOH risk factors have varied effects on health outcomes among different city groups but similar effects within city groups. Our study has 2 policy implications. First, cities in different groups should prioritize different resources for SDOH risk mitigation to maximize health outcomes. Second, cities in the same group can share knowledge and enable more effective SDOH-enabled policy transfers for population health.

Documentation of Behavioral Health Risk Factors in a Large Academic Primary Care Clinic

Objective:

To determine the prevalence of alcohol, smoking, and physical activity status documentation at a family health team in Toronto, Ontario, and to explore the patient characteristics that predict documentation of these lifestyle risk factor statuses.

Design:

Manual retrospective review of electronic medical records (EMRs).

Setting:

Large, urban, academic family health team in Toronto, Ontario.

Participants:

Patients over the age of 18 that had attended a routine clinical appointment in March, 2018.

Main Outcome Measures:

Prevalence and content of risk factor status in electronic medical records for alcohol, smoking, and physical activity.

Results:

The prevalence of alcohol, smoking, and physical activity documentation was 86.4%, 90.4%, and 66.1%, respectively. These lifestyle risk factor statuses were most often documented in the “risk factors” section of the EMR (83.7% for alcohol, 88.1% for smoking, and 47.9% for physical activity). Completion of a periodic health review within 1 year was most strongly associated with documentation (alcohol odds ratio [OR] 9.79, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 2.12, 45.15; smoking OR 1.77 95% CI 0.51, 6.20; physical activity OR 3.52 95% CI 1.67, 7.40).

Conclusion:

Documentation of lifestyle risk factor statuses is strongly associated with having a recent periodic health review. If “annual physicals” continue to decline, primary care providers should final additional opportunities to address these key determinants of health.

Improved preventive care clinical decision-making efficiency: leveraging a point-of-care clinical decision support system

Background

Electronic medical records are widely used in family practices across Canada and can improve health outcomes. However, recent reports indicate that physicians using electronic medical records work longer and have less direct patient contact which may contribute to burnout. Therefore, new and innovative digital tools are essential to reduce physician workloads and improve patient-physician interaction to address physician burnout. The objective of this study was to assess the efficiency and accuracy of clinical decision-making when using a new preventive care point-of-care clinical decision support system (CDSS). An estimate of the potential annual time savings was also determined. This study also assessed physician reported perceived usefulness and ease of use of the CDSS.

Methods

Quantitative and qualitative data were collected during this study. Each participant evaluated two simulated patient charts and identified which preventive care metrics were due. The participants recorded their decisions and the time required to assess each chart. Participants then completed a Technology Acceptance Model survey regarding the perceived usefulness and ease of use of the CDSS, which included qualitative feedback. The amount of time saved was determined and participants’ clinical decision-making accuracy was scored against current Canadian preventive care guidelines. The number of preventive care specific visits completed per year was determined using clinic billing data.

Results

The preventive care CDSS saved an average of 195.7 s of chart review time (249.5 s vs 445.2 s; P < 0.001). A total of 1520 preventive visits were performed at Primrose and Bruyère Family Medicine Centres. Extrapolated across the organization, implementation of the new tool could save 82.6 h per year. Decision-making accuracy was not affected by the new tool (78.4% vs 80.9%, P > 0.05). Participants rated the perceived ease of use and usefulness to be very high.

Conclusions

New digital tools may reduce providers’ workload without impacting clinical decision-making accuracy. Participants indicated that the preventive care CDSS was useful and easy to use. Further software development and clinical studies are required to further improve and characterize the effect this new CDSS has when implemented in clinical practice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01675-8.

Strategies to improve smoking cessation rates in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care is an important setting in which to treat tobacco addiction. However, the rates at which providers address smoking cessation and the success of that support vary. Strategies can be implemented to improve and increase the delivery of smoking cessation support (e.g. through provider training), and to increase the amount and breadth of support given to people who smoke (e.g. through additional counseling or tailored printed materials).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of strategies intended to increase the success of smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings. To assess whether any effect that these interventions have on smoking cessation may be due to increased implementation by healthcare providers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries to 10 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (cRCTs) carried out in primary care, including non-pregnant adults. Studies investigated a strategy or strategies to improve the implementation or success of smoking cessation treatment in primary care. These strategies could include interventions designed to increase or enhance the quality of existing support, or smoking cessation interventions offered in addition to standard care (adjunctive interventions). Intervention strategies had to be tested in addition to and in comparison with standard care, or in addition to other active intervention strategies if the effect of an individual strategy could be isolated. Standard care typically incorporates physician-delivered brief behavioral support, and an offer of smoking cessation medication, but differs across studies. Studies had to measure smoking abstinence at six months' follow-up or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome - smoking abstinence - was measured using the most rigorous intention-to-treat definition available. We also extracted outcome data for quit attempts, and the following markers of healthcare provider performance: asking about smoking status; advising on cessation; assessment of participant readiness to quit; assisting with cessation; arranging follow-up for smoking participants. Where more than one study investigated the same strategy or set of strategies, and measured the same outcome, we conducted meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 81 RCTs and cRCTs, involving 112,159 participants. Fourteen were rated at low risk of bias, 44 at high risk, and the remainder at unclear risk. We identified moderate-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency, that the provision of adjunctive counseling by a health professional other than the physician (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.55; I2 = 44%; 22 studies, 18,150 participants), and provision of cost-free medications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.76; I2 = 63%; 10 studies,7560 participants) increased smoking quit rates in primary care. There was also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that the addition of tailored print materials to standard smoking cessation treatment increased the number of people who had successfully stopped smoking at six months' follow-up or more (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; I2 = 37%; 6 studies, 15,978 participants). There was no clear evidence that providing participants who smoked with biomedical risk feedback increased their likelihood of quitting (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.41; I2 = 40%; 7 studies, 3491 participants), or that provider smoking cessation training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; I2 = 66%; 7 studies, 13,685 participants) or provider incentives (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2454 participants) increased smoking abstinence rates. However, in assessing the former two strategies we judged the evidence to be of low certainty and in assessing the latter strategies it was of very low certainty. We downgraded the evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias across these comparisons. There was some indication that provider training increased the delivery of smoking cessation support, along with the provision of adjunctive counseling and cost-free medications. However, our secondary outcomes were not measured consistently, and in many cases analyses were subject to substantial statistical heterogeneity, imprecision, or both, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Thirty-four studies investigated multicomponent interventions to improve smoking cessation rates. There was substantial variation in the combinations of strategies tested, and the resulting individual study effect estimates, precluding meta-analyses in most cases. Meta-analyses provided some evidence that adjunctive counseling combined with either cost-free medications or provider training enhanced quit rates when compared with standard care alone. However, analyses were limited by small numbers of events, high statistical heterogeneity, and studies at high risk of bias. Analyses looking at the effects of combining provider training with flow sheets to aid physician decision-making, and with outreach facilitation, found no clear evidence that these combinations increased quit rates; however, analyses were limited by imprecision, and there was some indication that these approaches did improve some forms of provider implementation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing adjunctive counseling by an allied health professional, cost-free smoking cessation medications, and tailored printed materials as part of smoking cessation support in primary care can increase the number of people who achieve smoking cessation. There is no clear evidence that providing participants with biomedical risk feedback, or primary care providers with training or incentives to provide smoking cessation support enhance quit rates. However, we rated this evidence as of low or very low certainty, and so conclusions are likely to change as further evidence becomes available. Most of the studies in this review evaluated smoking cessation interventions that had already been extensively tested in the general population. Further studies should assess strategies designed to optimize the delivery of those interventions already known to be effective within the primary care setting. Such studies should be cluster-randomized to account for the implications of implementation in this particular setting. Due to substantial variation between studies in this review, identifying optimal characteristics of multicomponent interventions to improve the delivery of smoking cessation treatment was challenging. Future research could use component network meta-analysis to investigate this further.

Income-based inequality in nationwide general health checkup participation in Japan

OBJECTIVE

In Japan, it is mandatory for employers to provide general health checkup opportunities to employees. Although many companies have subsidized checkups for employees' dependent family members, their participation is low. We assessed income-based inequality in the participation of employees' dependents in the general health checkup.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional descriptive study. Annual participation rate in general health checkup and various factors including income, age, and sex were collected and analyzed to examine the income-based inequality of participation rate in general health checkup.

METHODS

The data for the present study were sourced from the Fukuoka Branch of the Japan Health Insurance Association, a large medical insurer in Japan. We extracted data of 196,057 dependents aged 40-74 years. We conducted a multiple logistic regression analysis using participation from April 2015 to March 2016 as dependent variable and income category ranging from 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest) between April and June 2015 as independent variable (adjusted for sex and age). We computed slope index of inequality (SII) and relative index of inequality (RII) based on income category.

RESULTS

Higher the income, the more likely were dependents to participate in the general health checkup. SII for the participation rate of general health checkup ranged between -0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.07 to 0.03) and 0.06 (0.03-0.09) for men; 0.03 (0.01-0.06) and 0.10 (0.09-0.11) for women. RII for the participation rate of general health checkup ranged between -0.19 (95% CI: -0.66 to 0.29) and 0.88 (0.15-1.61) for men; 0.22 (0.05-0.39) and 0.68 (0.60-0.76) for women. The highest inequality existed for men in their 50s and 60s and women in their 50s; the lowest inequality was among men and women aged 70-74 years.

CONCLUSION

There was income-based inequality in participation in the general health checkup among dependents (family members) of the insured persons. The degree of inequality differed with age group. It cannot be explained solely by financial barrier among low-income group, rather it may reflect Japanese unique context in medical insurance system.

Identifying gaps in patient access to diabetic screening eye examinations in Ontario: a provincially representative cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes is the leading cause of acquired blindness in Canadians under the age of 50 years, and diabetic retinopathy affects an estimated 500 000 Canadians. Early identification of retinopathy with screening eye examinations allows for secondary prevention. To understand the need for resource allotment in diabetic screening, we undertook a cross-sectional study of key demographics and geographics of screened and unscreened patients in Ontario.

METHODS

Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) records were derived from physician and optometry billing, matched with patients aged >19 years with prevalent diabetes between 2011 and 2013. Data were cross-correlated with demographic covariates, including age, sex, income quintile, immigrant status, as well as geographic covariates such as rurality and patient Local Health Integration Network (LHIN).

RESULTS

Of almost 1 146 000 patients included in the analysis, approximately 406 000 were unscreened. Of note, this included 234 000 adults aged 40-64 years. Approximately 818 000 patients with diabetes lived in large cities, and 301 000 (37%) were unscreened. When the City of Toronto was analyzed as an urban area with the highest density of unscreened prevalence, autocorrelation between the percentage of eye examinations among patients with diabetes aged >40 years and low-income revealed that large areas of Toronto Central correlated for low examination rates and low income. The majority (13/22) of Community Health Centres are present in these areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Large cross-sectional population statistics for diabetes prevalence and ophthalmic examinations provides a geographic and socioeconomic profile for populations of middle-aged adults in large urban areas at risk for developing diabetic retinopathy and who might benefit from interventions to improve the rates of screening eye examinations.

Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Printed educational materials are widely used dissemination strategies to improve the quality of healthcare professionals' practice and patient health outcomes. Traditionally they are presented in paper formats such as monographs, publication in peer-reviewed journals and clinical guidelines. This is the fourth update of the review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of printed educational materials (PEMs) on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient health outcomes. To explore the influence of some of the characteristics of the printed educational materials (e.g. source, content, format) on their effect on healthcare professionals' practice and patient health outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), HealthStar, CINAHL, ERIC, CAB Abstracts, Global Health, and EPOC Register from their inception to 6 February 2019. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials (RTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series studies (ITSs) that evaluated the impact of PEMs on healthcare professionals' practice or patient health outcomes. We included three types of comparisons: (1) PEM versus no intervention, (2) PEM versus single intervention, (3) multifaceted intervention where PEM is included versus multifaceted intervention without PEM. Any objective measure of professional practice (e.g. prescriptions for a particular drug), or patient health outcomes (e.g. blood pressure) were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers undertook data extraction independently. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. For analyses, we grouped the included studies according to study design, type of outcome and type of comparison. For controlled trials, we reported the median effect size for each outcome within each study, the median effect size across outcomes for each study and the median of these effect sizes across studies. Where data were available, we re-analysed the ITS studies by converting all data to a monthly basis and estimating the effect size from the change in the slope of the regression line between before and after implementation of the PEM. We reported median changes in slope for each outcome, for each study, and then across studies. We standardised all changes in slopes by their standard error, allowing comparisons and combination of different outcomes. We categorised each PEM according to potential effects modifiers related to the source of the PEMs, the channel used for their delivery, their content, and their format. We assessed the risks of bias of all the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 84 studies: 32 RTs, two CBAs and 50 ITS studies. Of the 32 RTs, 19 were cluster RTs that used various units of randomisation, such as practices, health centres, towns, or areas. The majority of the included studies (82/84) compared the effectiveness of PEMs to no intervention. Based on the RTs that provided moderate-certainty evidence, we found that PEMs distributed to healthcare professionals probably improve their practice, as measured with dichotomous variables, compared to no intervention (median absolute risk difference (ARD): 0.04; interquartile range (IQR): 0.01 to 0.09; 3,963 healthcare professionals randomised within 3073 units). We could not confirm this finding using the evidence gathered from continuous variables (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.11; IQR: -0.16 to 0.52; 1631 healthcare professionals randomised within 1373 units ), from the ITS studies (standardised median change in slope = 0.69; 35 studies), or from the CBA study because the certainty of this evidence was very low. We also found, based on RTs that provided moderate-certainty evidence, that PEMs distributed to healthcare professionals probably make little or no difference to patient health as measured using dichotomous variables, compared to no intervention (ARD: 0.02; IQR: -0.005 to 0.09; 935,015 patients randomised within 959 units). The evidence gathered from continuous variables (SMD: 0.05; IQR: -0.12 to 0.09; 6,737 patients randomised within 594 units) or from ITS study results (standardised median change in slope = 1.12; 8 studies) do not strengthen these findings because the certainty of this evidence was very low. Two studies (a randomised trial and a CBA) compared a paper-based version to a computerised version of the same PEM. From the RT that provided evidence of low certainty, we found that PEM in computerised versions may make little or no difference to professionals' practice compared to PEM in printed versions (ARD: -0.02; IQR: -0.03 to 0.00; 139 healthcare professionals randomised individually). This finding was not strengthened by the CBA study that provided very low certainty evidence (SMD: 0.44; 32 healthcare professionals). The data gathered did not allow us to conclude which PEM characteristics influenced their effectiveness. The methodological quality of the included studies was variable. Half of the included RTs were at risk of selection bias. Most of the ITS studies were conducted retrospectively, without prespecifying the expected effect of the intervention, or acknowledging the presence of a secular trend.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review suggest that, when used alone and compared to no intervention, PEMs may slightly improve healthcare professionals' practice outcomes and patient health outcomes. The effectiveness of PEMs compared to other interventions, or of PEMs as part of a multifaceted intervention, is uncertain.

Organised and opportunistic prevention in primary health care: estimation of missed opportunities by population based health interview surveys in Hungary

Background

Improvement of preventive services for adults can be achieved by opportunistic or organised methods in primary care. The unexploited opportunities of these approaches were estimated by our investigation.

Methods

Data from the Hungarian implementation of European Health Interview Surveys in 2009 (N = 4709) and 2014 (N = 5352) were analysed. Proportion of subjects used interventions in target group (screening for hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and influenza vaccination) within a year were calculated. Taking into consideration recommendations for the frequency of intervention, numbers of missed interventions among patients visited a general practitioner in a year and among patients did not visit a general practitioner in a year were calculated in order to describe missed opportunities that could be utilised by opportunistic or organised approaches. Numbers of missed interventions were estimated for the entire population of the country and for an average-sized general medical practice.

Results

Implementation ratio were 66.8% for blood pressure measurement among subjects above 40 years and free of diagnosed hypertension; 63.5% for checking blood glucose among adults above 45 and overweighed and free of diagnosed diabetes mellitus; and 19.1% for vaccination against seasonal influenza. There were 4.1 million interventions implemented a year in Hungary, most of the (3.8 million) among adults visited general practitioner in a year. The number of missed interventions was 4.5 million a year; mostly (3.4 million) among persons visited general practitioner in a year. For Hungary, the opportunistic and organised missed opportunities were estimated to be 561,098, and 1,150,321 for hypertension screening; 363,270, and 227,543 for diabetes mellitus screening; 2,784,072, and 380,033 for influenza vaccination among the < 60 years old high risk subjects, and 3,029,700 and 494,150 for influenza vaccination among more than 60 years old adults, respectively. By implementing all missed services, the workload in an average-sized general medical practice would be increased by 12–13 opportunistic and 4–5 organised interventions a week.

Conclusions

The studied interventions are much less used than recommended. The opportunistic missed opportunities is prevailing for influenza vaccination, and the organised one is for hypertension screening. The two approaches have similar significance for diabetes mellitus screening.

A systematic review of approaches to improve practice, detection and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use in primary health care: a role for continuous quality improvement

BACKGROUND

Unhealthy alcohol use involves a spectrum from hazardous use (exceeding guidelines but no harms) through to alcohol dependence. Evidence-based management of unhealthy alcohol use in primary health care has been recommended since 1979. However, sustained and systematic implementation has proven challenging. The Continuing Quality Improvement (CQI) process is designed to enable services to detect barriers, then devise and implement changes, resulting in service improvements.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature reporting on strategies to improve implementation of screening and interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care (MEDLINE EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Australian Indigenous Health InfoNet). Additional inclusion criteria were: (1) pragmatic setting; (2) reporting original data; (3) quantitative outcomes related to provision of service or change in practice. We investigate the extent to which the three essential elements of CQI are being used (data-guided activities, considering local conditions; iterative development). We compare characteristics of programs that include these three elements with those that do not. We describe the types, organizational levels (e.g. health service, practice, clinician), duration of strategies, and their outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-six papers representing 45 projects were included. Of these, 24 papers were randomized controlled trials, 12 controlled studies and 20 before/after and other designs. Most reported on strategies for improving implementation of screening and brief intervention. Only six addressed relapse prevention pharmacotherapies. Only five reported on patient outcomes and none showed significant improvement. The three essential CQI elements were clearly identifiable in 12 reports. More studies with three essential CQI elements had implementation and follow-up durations above the median; utilised multifaceted designs; targeted both practice and health system levels; improved screening and brief intervention than studies without the CQI elements.

CONCLUSION

Utilizing CQI methods in implementation research would appear to be well-suited to drive improvements in service delivery for unhealthy alcohol use. However, the body of literature describing such studies is still small. More well-designed research, including hybrid studies of both implementation and patient outcomes, will be needed to draw clearer conclusions on the optimal approach for implementing screening and treatment for unhealthy alcohol use. (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42018110475).

Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper: effects on professional practice and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Health professionals sometimes do not use the best evidence to treat their patients, in part due to unconscious acts of omission and information overload. Reminders help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know, or by presenting information in a different and more accessible format. Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper are defined as information given to the health professional with each patient or encounter, provided on paper, in which no computer is involved in the production or delivery of the reminder. Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper are relatively cheap interventions, and are especially relevant in settings where electronic clinical records are not widely available and affordable. This review is one of three Cochrane Reviews focused on the effectiveness of reminders in health care.

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the effectiveness of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper in changing professional practice and improving patient outcomes. 2. To explore whether a number of potential effect modifiers influence the effectiveness of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers on 5 December 2018. We searched grey literature, screened individual journals, conference proceedings and relevant systematic reviews, and reviewed reference lists and cited references of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and non-randomised trials assessing the impact of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper as a single intervention (compared with usual care) or added to one or more co-interventions as a multicomponent intervention (compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component) on professional practice or patients' outcomes. We also included randomised and non-randomised trials comparing manually-generated reminders with other quality improvement (QI) interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data independently. We extracted the primary outcome as defined by the authors or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes in each study. We then calculated the median percentage improvement and interquartile range across the included studies that reported improvement related outcomes, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 63 studies (41 cluster-randomised trials, 18 individual randomised trials, and four non-randomised trials) that met all inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven studies reported usable data (64 comparisons). The studies were mainly located in North America (42 studies) and the UK (eight studies). Fifty-four studies took place in outpatient/ambulatory settings. The clinical areas most commonly targeted were cardiovascular disease management (11 studies), cancer screening (10 studies) and preventive care (10 studies), and most studies had physicians as their target population (57 studies). General management of a clinical condition (17 studies), test-ordering (14 studies) and prescription (10 studies) were the behaviours more commonly targeted by the intervention. Forty-eight studies reported changes in professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes (e.g. compliance with guidelines recommendations), 16 reported those changes measured as continuous process-of-care outcomes (e.g. number of days with catheters), eight reported dichotomous patient outcomes (e.g. mortality rates) and five reported continuous patient outcomes (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure). Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper probably improve professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes) compared with usual care (median improvement 8.45% (IQR 2.54% to 20.58%); 39 comparisons, 40,346 participants; moderate certainty of evidence) and may make little or no difference to continuous process-of-care outcomes (8 comparisons, 3263 participants; low certainty of evidence). Adding manually-generated paper reminders to one or more QI co-interventions may slightly improve professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes (median improvement 4.24% (IQR -1.09% to 5.50%); 12 comparisons, 25,359 participants; low certainty of evidence) and probably slightly improve professional practice measured as continuous outcomes (median improvement 0.28 (IQR 0.04 to 0.51); 2 comparisons, 12,372 participants; moderate certainty of evidence). Compared with other QI interventions, manually-generated reminders may slightly decrease professional practice measured as process adherence outcomes (median decrease 7.9% (IQR -0.7% to 11%); 14 comparisons, 21,274 participants; low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether manually-generated reminders delivered on paper, compared with usual care or with other QI intervention, lead to better or worse patient outcomes (dichotomous or continuous), as the certainty of the evidence is very low (10 studies, 13 comparisons). Reminders added to other QI interventions may make little or no difference to patient outcomes (dichotomous or continuous) compared with the QI alone (2 studies, 2 comparisons). Regarding resource use, studies reported additional costs per additional point of effectiveness gained, but because of the different currencies and years used the relevance of those figures is uncertain. None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper as a single intervention probably lead to small to moderate increases in outcomes related to adherence to clinical recommendations, and they could be used as a single QI intervention. It is uncertain whether reminders should be added to other QI intervention already in place in the health system, although the effects may be positive. If other QI interventions, such as patient or computerised reminders, are available, they should be preferred over manually-generated reminders, but under close evaluation in order to decrease uncertainty about their potential effect.

Reducing physician voiding cystourethrogram ordering in children with first febrile urinary tract infection: evaluation of a purposefully sequenced educational intervention

BACKGROUND

Physicians often fail to implement clinical practice guidelines. Our aim was to evaluate whether a purposefully sequenced, multifaceted educational intervention would increase physician adherence to a guideline for voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG) use following first urinary tract infection (UTI) in young children.

METHODS

Using a single centre, pretest-posttest design, we compared the proportion of guideline adherent VCUG orders and the VCUG ordering rate before and after three educational interventions (interactive lecture, clinical pathway, faxed reminder) selected and sequenced according to the PRECEDE (Predisposing, Reinforcing and Enabling Constructs in Educational Diagnosis and Evaluation) health promotion model.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine physicians ordered 219 VCUGs for 219 children. Following the interventions, there was an increase in the monthly proportion of adherent VCUGs ordered by pediatricians (analysis of variance (ANOVA) F(2,29) = 3.38, p = .048) and non-pediatricians (ANOVA F(2,28) = 14.71, p < .001). Also, pediatricians decreased their monthly VCUG ordering rate (linear trend incidence rate ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.54, 0.99]). Pediatricians were more likely to adhere with the guideline than were non-pediatricians (odds ratio 2.91, 95% CI [1.5, 5.5]).

CONCLUSION

Exposure to purposefully sequenced educational interventions based on the PRECEDE model was associated with increased adherence to guideline recommendations.

Using machine-learning approaches to predict non-participation in a nationwide general health check-up scheme

BACKGROUND

In the time since the launch of a nationwide general health check-up and instruction program in Japan in 2008, interest in the formulation of an effective and efficient strategy to improve the participation rate has been growing. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate models identifying those who are unlikely to undergo general health check-ups. We used machine-learning methods to select interventional targets more efficiently.

METHODS

We used information from a local government database of Japan. The study population included 7290 individuals aged 40-74 years who underwent at least one general health check-up between 2012 and 2015. We developed four predictive models based on the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), support vector machines (SVMs), and logistic regression (LR) algorithms, using machine-learning techniques, and compared the areas under the curves (AUCs) of the models with those of the heuristic method (which presumes that the individuals who underwent a general health check-up in the previous year will do so again in the following year).

RESULTS

The AUCs for the XGBoost, RF, SVMs, LR, and heuristic models/method were 0.829 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.806-0.853), 0.821 (95% CI: 0.797-0.845), 0.812 (95% CI: 0.787-0.837), 0.816 (95% CI: 0.791-0.841), and 0.683 (95% CI: 0.657-0.708), respectively. XGBoost model exhibited the best AUC, and the performance was significantly better than that of SVMs (p = 0.034), LR (p = 0.017), and heuristic method (p < 0.001). However, the performance of XGBoost did not differ significantly from that of RF (p = 0.229).

CONCLUSION

Predictive models using machine-learning techniques outperformed the existing heuristic method when used to predict participation in a general health check-up system by eligible participants.

Prediction models to identify individuals at risk of metabolic syndrome who are unlikely to participate in a health intervention program

OBJECTIVES

Since the launch of a nationwide general health check-up and instruction program in Japan in 2008, interest in strategies to improve implementation of the program based on predictive analytics has grown. We investigated the performance of prediction models developed to identify individuals classified as "requiring instruction" (high-risk) who were unlikely to participate in a health intervention program.

METHODS

Data were obtained from one large health insurance union in Japan. The study population included individuals who underwent at least one general health check-up between 2008 and 2013 and were identified as "requiring instruction" in 2013. We developed three prediction models based on the gradient boosted trees (GBT), random forest (RF), and logistic regression (LR) algorithms using machine-learning techniques and compared the areas under the curve (AUC) of the developed models with those of two conventional methods The aim of the models was to identify at-risk individuals who were unlikely to participate in the instruction program in 2013 after being classified as requiring instruction at their general health check-up that year.

RESULTS

At first we performed the analysis using data without multiple imputation. The AUC values for the GBT, RF, and LR prediction models and conventional methods: 1, and 2 were 0.893 (95%CI: 0.882-0.905), 0.889 (95%CI: 0.877-0.901), 0.885 (95%CI: 0.872-0.897), 0.784 (95%CI: 0.767-0.800), and 0.757 (95%CI: 0.741-0.773), respectively. Subsequently, we performed the analysis using data after multiple imputation. The AUC values for the GBT, RF, and LR prediction models and conventional methods: 1, and 2 were 0.894 (95%CI: 0.882-0.906), 0.889 (95%CI: 0.887-0.901), 0.885 (95%CI: 0.872-0.898), 0.784 (95%CI: 0.767-0.800), and 0.757 (95%CI: 0.741-0.773), respectively. In both analyses, the GBT model showed the highest AUC among that of other models, and statistically significant difference were found in comparison with the LR model, conventional method 1, and conventional method 2.

CONCLUSION

The prediction models using machine-learning techniques outperformed existing conventional methods: for predicting participation in the instruction program among participants identified as "requiring instruction" (high-risk).

Tools for improving clinical preventive services receipt among women with disabilities of childbearing ages and beyond

Efforts to improve clinical preventive services (CPS) receipt among women with disabilities are poorly understood and not widely disseminated. The reported results represent a 2-year, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs partnership to develop a central resource for existing tools that are of potential use to maternal and child health practitioners who work with women with disabilities. Steps included contacting experts in the fields of disability and women's health, searching the Internet to locate examples of existing tools that may facilitate CPS receipt, convening key stakeholders from state and community-based programs to determine their potential use of the tools, and developing an online Toolbox. Nine examples of existing tools were located. The tools focused on facilitating use of the CPS guidelines, monitoring CPS receipt among women with disabilities, improving the accessibility of communities and local transportation, and training clinicians and women with disabilities. Stakeholders affirmed the relevance of these tools to their work and encouraged developing a Toolbox. The Toolbox, launched in May 2013, provides information and links to existing tools and accepts feedback and proposals for additional tools. This Toolbox offers central access to existing tools. Maternal and child health stakeholders and other service providers can better locate, adopt and implement existing tools to facilitate CPS receipt among adolescent girls with disabilities who are transitioning into adult care as well as women with disabilities of childbearing ages and beyond.

Adult health checkup: Update on the Preventive Care Checklist Form©

OBJECTIVE

To describe updates to the Preventive Care Checklist Form© to help family physicians stay up to date with current preventive health care recommendations.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

The Ovid MEDLINE database was searched using specified key words and other terms relevant to the periodic health examination. Secondary sources, such as the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Trip database, and the Canadian Medical Association Infobase, were also searched. Recommendations for preventive health care for average-risk adults were reviewed. Strong and weak recommendations are presented on the form in bold and italic text, respectively.

MAIN MESSAGE

Updates were made to the form based on the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care recommendations on screening for obesity (2015), cervical cancer (2013), depression (2013), osteoporosis (2013), hypertension (2012), diabetes (2012, 2013), and breast cancer (2011). Updates were made based on recommendations from other Canadian organizations on screening for HIV (2013), screening for sexually transmitted infections (2013), immunizations (2012 to 2014), screening for dyslipidemia (2012), fertility counseling for women (2011, 2012), and screening for colorectal cancer (2010). Some previous recommendations were removed and others lacking evidence were not included.

CONCLUSION

The Preventive Care Checklist Form has been updated with current recommendations to enable family physicians to provide comprehensive, evidence-based care to patients during periodic health examinations.

Development of a periodic health examination form for the frail elderly in long-term care

OBJECTIVE

To create an evidence-based periodic health examination (PHE) form geared to long-term care (LTC) residents.

DESIGN

Two-phase study: literature review to develop a quantitative, cross-sectional, self-administered survey, and administration of the survey followed by a focus group. A PHE form for LTC residents was developed based on participants' recommendations.

SETTING

Hamilton, Ont.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 106 health care professionals completed the survey; 10 LTC physicians participated in the focus group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The items deemed most important and most likely to be performed during a PHE; themes from focus group discussions.

RESULTS

Respondents' top 4 most important PHE items were also the top 4 items they thought were most likely to be performed during a PHE in LTC: reviewing active health status, reviewing pain control, reviewing medications, and screening for falls. Thematic analysis from the focus group discussion generated 3 main themes: current physician perspectives on the existing annual health examination in LTC, conceptual ideas for the new PHE form, and physician perspectives on the optimization of care in LTC settings. The findings from the survey, along with the themes from the focus group, were incorporated to create a PHE form for LTC residents.

CONCLUSION

The proposed PHE form emphasizes tracking a patient's functional course over time and combines evidence-based preventive health interventions and health assessments with what is clinically important for LTC.

What is the effectiveness of printed educational materials on primary care physician knowledge, behaviour, and patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Printed educational materials (PEMs) are commonly used simple interventions that can be used alone or with other interventions to disseminate clinical evidence. They have been shown to have a small effect on health professional behaviour. However, we do not know whether they are effective in primary care. We investigated whether PEMs improve primary care physician (PCP) knowledge, behaviour, and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of PEMs developed for PCPs. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials, quasi randomized controlled trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series. We combined studies using meta-analyses when possible. Statistical heterogeneity was examined, and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model when significant statistical heterogeneity was present and a fixed effects model otherwise. The template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist was used to assess the quality of intervention description.

RESULTS

Our search identified 12,439 studies and 40 studies met our inclusion criteria. We combined outcomes from 26 studies in eight meta-analyses. No significant effect was found on clinically important patient outcomes, physician behaviour, or physician cognition when PEMs were compared to usual care. In the 14 studies that could not be included in the meta-analyses, 14 of 71 outcomes were significantly improved following receipt of PEMs compared to usual care. Most studies lacked details needed to replicate the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

PEMs were not effective at improving patient outcomes, knowledge, or behaviour of PCPs. Further trials should explore ways to optimize the intervention and provide detailed information on the design of the materials.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42013004356.

Variability in screening prevention activities in primary care in Spain: a multilevel analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of the benefits of prevention activities, studies have reported only partial integration and great variability of screening in daily clinical practice. The study objectives were: 1) To describe Primary Health Care (PHC) screening for arterial hypertension, dyslipidaemia, obesity, tobacco use, and excessive alcohol consumption in 2008 in 2 regions of Spain, based on electronic health records, and 2) To assess and quantify variability in screening, and identify factors (of patient, general practitioners and PHC team) associated with being screened, that are common throughout the PHC population.

METHODS

Multicentre, cross-sectional study of individuals aged ≥ 16 years (N = 468,940) who visited the 426 general practitioners (GPs) in 44 PHC teams in Catalonia and Navarre in 2008.

OUTCOMES

screening for hypertension, dyslipidaemia, obesity, tobacco use, and excessive alcohol consumption. Other variables were considered at the individual (sociodemographics, visits, health problems), GP and PHC team (region among others). Individual and contextual factors associated with the odds of being screened and the variance attributable to each level were identified using the SAS PROC GLIMMIX macro.

RESULTS

The most prevalent screenings were for dyslipidaemia (64.4%) and hypertension (50.8%); the least prevalent was tobacco use (36.6%). Overall, the odds of being screened were higher for women, older patients, those with more comorbidities, more cardiovascular risk factors, and more frequent office visits, and those assigned to a female GP, a GP with a lower patient load, or a PHC team with a lower percentage of patients older than 65 years. On average, individuals in Navarre were less likely to be screened than those in Catalonia. Hypertension and dyslipidaemia screenings had the least unexplained variability between PHC teams and GPs, respectively, after adjusting for individual and contextual factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the studied screenings, those for obesity, tobacco, and alcohol use were the least prevalent. Attention to screening, especially for tobacco and alcohol, can be greatly improved in the PHC setting.

Vaccines for adults: The time has come

The benefits of vaccines for adults have been underappreciated because of the focus on childhood vaccines. However, precisely because of the success of immunization programs for children, most deaths from vaccine-preventable diseases now occur amongst adults. Tetanus boosters will help to maintain Canada's low tetanus rates and pertussis boosters for adults are now available. Human papilloma virus vaccine may be indicated in some older adults. Hepatitis A and B vaccines may be indicated if there is occupational, travel or lifestyle risk. Pneumococcal and zoster vaccines are recommended in those over 65 years of age, and all adults benefit from annual influenza vaccination. A systematic approach to immunizing adults would assist in ensuring that all who are eligible for specific vaccines are offered them. This approach would include promoting routine immunization as a fundamental part of every patient encounter and the use of tools, such as the Adult Immunization Questionnaire and the Adult Immunization Wallet Card. By investing in these strategies, the health of adults can be improved significantly.

Test ordering for preventive health care among family medicine residents

OBJECTIVE

To determine which screening tests family medicine residents order as part of preventive health care.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Alberta and Ontario.

PARTICIPANTS

First- and second-year family medicine residents at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, the University of Calgary in Alberta, and McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont, during the 2011 to 2012 academic year.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic information, Likert scale ratings assessing ordering attitudes, and selections from a list of 38 possible tests that could be ordered for preventive health care for sample 38-year-old and 55-year-old female and male patients. Descriptive and comparative statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 318 of 482 residents (66%) completed the survey. Recommended or appropriate tests were ordered by 82% (for cervical cytology) to 95% (for fasting glucose measurement) of residents. Across the different sample patients, residents ordered an average of 3.3 to 5.7 inappropriate tests per patient, with 58% to 92% ordering at least 1 inappropriate test per patient. The estimated average excess costs varied from $38.39 for the 38-year-old man to $106.46 for the 55-year-old woman. More regular use of a periodic health examination screening template did not improve ordering (P = .88).

CONCLUSION

In general, residents ordered appropriate preventive health tests reasonably well but also ordered an average of 3.3 to 5.7 inappropriate tests for each patient. Training programs need to provide better education for trainees around inappropriate screening and work hard to establish good ordering behaviour in preparation for entering practice.

[The Bremen periodic health exam - feasibility of a new concept]

BACKGROUND

All members of the Statutory Health Insurance are entitled to receive preventive health examinations. The current concept, however, does not take individual risk factors into account systematically. To improve this, the "Bremen Health Examination" was developed. The central component is a screening questionnaire to be completed by the patient, which is stratified by age, i.e., 35 to 69 years and ≥ 70 years. The feasibility and acceptance of this concept have been assessed.

METHODS

In a prospective observational study, a selected sample of general practitioners (GPs) was asked to implement the questionnaires during all preventive health examinations within a four-week period. The GPs subsequently answered content-related questions as well as Likert-scaled questions on the relevance of the issues addressed, and the feasibility of the new concept.

RESULTS

17 out of 20 GPs approached for the study included a total of 171 patients. On average, the patients in the two groups were 52 and 75 years of age, respectively, and answered 4.4 prompting questions positively. Age and gender had no significant effect on the frequency of "positively" answered questions. Implementing the questionnaire extended the duration of the health examination, however, GPs overall rated the time required for discussing newly assessed problems as adequate (four-level Likert scale, 1=yes; 4=no; Ø 1.59; SD 0.77).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the Bremen Health Examination appears to be feasible from the GP perspective.

Front-office staff can improve clinical tobacco intervention: health coordinator pilot project

OBJECTIVE

To learn whether front-line personnel in primary care practices can increase delivery of clinical tobacco interventions and also help smokers address physical inactivity, at-risk alcohol use, and depression.

DESIGN

Uncontrolled before-and-after design.

SETTING

Vancouver, BC, area (4 practices); northern British Columbia (2 practices).

PARTICIPANTS

Six practices, with 1 staff person per practice serving as a "health coordinator" who tracked and, after the baseline period, delivered preventive interventions to all patients who smoked. To assess delivery of preventive interventions, each practice was to sample 300 consecutive patient records, both at baseline and at follow-up 15 months later.

INTERVENTIONS

Front-office staff were recruited, trained, paid, and given ongoing support to provide preventive care. Clinicians supplemented this care with advice and guided the use of medication.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effectiveness of the intervention was based on comparison, at baseline and at follow-up, of the proportion of patients with any of the following 6 proven intervention components documented in their medical records: chart reminder, advice received, self-management plan, target quit date, referral, and follow-up date (as they applied to tobacco, physical inactivity, at-risk alcohol use, and depression). A Tobacco Intervention Flow Sheet cued preventive care, and its data were entered into a spreadsheet (which served as a smokers' registry). Qualitative appraisal data were noted.

RESULTS

For tobacco, substantial increases occurred after the intervention period in the proportion of patients with each of the intervention components noted in their charts: chart reminder (20% vs 94%); provision of advice (34% vs 79%); self-management plan (14% vs 57%); target quit date (5% vs 11%); referral (6% vs 11%); and follow-up date (7% vs 42%). Interventions for physical inactivity and depression showed some gains, but there were no gains for at-risk alcohol use. Front-line staff, patients, and clinicians were enthusiastic about the services offered.

CONCLUSION

Selected front-office personnel can substantially increase the delivery of evidence-based clinical tobacco intervention and increase patient and staff satisfaction in doing so. How far these findings can be generalized and their population effects require further study.

Sustained use of a tool for lifestyle intervention implemented in primary health care: a 2-year follow-up

RATIONAL, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Sustainability of new methods implemented in health care is one of the most central issues in addressing the gap between research and practice, but is seldom assessed in implementation studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a new tool for lifestyle intervention in primary health care (PHC) 2 years after the introduction, and assess if the implementation strategy used influenced sustainability.

METHOD

A computer-based lifestyle intervention tool (CLT) was introduced at six PHC units in Sweden in 2008, using two implementation strategies: explicit and implicit. The main difference between the strategies was a 4-week test period followed by a decision session, included in the explicit strategy. Evaluations were performed after 6, 9 and 24 months. After 24 months, the RE-AIM framework was applied to assess and compare outcome according to strategy.

RESULTS

A more positive outcome regarding reach, effectiveness, adoption and implementation in the explicit group could be almost completely attributed to one of the units. Maintenance was low and after 24 months, differences according to strategy were negligible.

CONCLUSION

After 24 months, the most positive outcomes regarding all RE-AIM dimensions were found in one of the units where the explicit strategy was used. The explicit strategy per se had some effect on the dimension effectiveness, but was not associated with sustainability overall. Staff at the most successful unit earlier had positive expectations regarding the CLT and found it compatible with existing routines.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals; effects on professional practice and health care outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting the doctor to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes of care (related to healthcare professionals' practice) and outcomes of care (related to patients' health condition).

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the EPOC Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the following databases between June 11-19, 2012: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Library (Economics, Methods, and Health Technology Assessment sections), Issue 6, 2012; MEDLINE, OVID (1946- ), Daily Update, and In-process; EMBASE, Ovid (1947- ); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980- ); EPOC Specialised Register, Reference Manager, and INSPEC, Engineering Village. The authors reviewed reference lists of related reviews and studies. 

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual or cluster-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes and/or outcomes of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. We contacted authors to obtain important missing information for studies that were published within the last 10 years. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median absolute improvement and interquartile range (IQR) in process adherence across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

In the 32 included studies, computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieved moderate improvement in professional practices, with a median improvement of processes of care of 7.0% (IQR: 3.9% to 16.4%). Implementing reminders alone improved care by 11.2% (IQR 6.5% to 19.6%) compared with usual care, while implementing reminders in addition to another intervention improved care by 4.0% only (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%) compared with the other intervention. The quality of evidence for these comparisons was rated as moderate according to the GRADE approach. Two reminder features were associated with larger effect sizes: providing space on the reminder for provider to enter a response (median 13.7% versus 4.3% for no response, P value = 0.01) and providing an explanation of the content or advice on the reminder (median 12.0% versus 4.2% for no explanation, P value = 0.02). Median improvement in processes of care also differed according to the behaviour the reminder targeted: for instance, reminders to vaccinate improved processes of care by 13.1% (IQR 12.2% to 20.7%) compared with other targeted behaviours. In the only study that had sufficient power to detect a clinically significant effect on outcomes of care, reminders were not associated with significant improvements.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieve moderate improvement in process of care. Two characteristics emerged as significant predictors of improvement: providing space on the reminder for a response from the clinician and providing an explanation of the reminder's content or advice. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can improve care in various settings under various conditions.

General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease

BACKGROUND

General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. These aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is, therefore, important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks with an emphasis on patient-relevant outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rather than on surrogate outcomes such as blood pressure and serum cholesterol levels.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Healthstar, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to July 2012. Two authors screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and read reference lists. One author used citation tracking (Web of Knowledge) and asked trialists about additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adults unselected for disease or risk factors. We did not include geriatric trials. We defined health checks as screening general populations for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. We contacted authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary. For mortality outcomes we analysed the results with random-effects model meta-analysis, and for other outcomes we did a qualitative synthesis as meta-analysis was not feasible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials, 14 of which had available outcome data (182,880 participants). Nine trials provided data on total mortality (155,899 participants, 11,940 deaths), median follow-up time nine years, giving a risk ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.03). Eight trials provided data on cardiovascular mortality (152,435 participants, 4567 deaths), risk ratio 1.03 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.17) and eight trials on cancer mortality (139,290 participants, 3663 deaths), risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.12). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter these findings.We did not find an effect on clinical events or other measures of morbidity but one trial found an increased occurrence of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia with screening and one trial found an increased occurence of self-reported chronic disease. One trial found a 20% increase in the total number of new diagnoses per participant over six years compared to the control group. No trials compared the total number of prescriptions, but two out of four trials found an increased number of people using antihypertensive drugs. Two out of four trials found small beneficial effects on self-reported health, but this could be due to reporting bias as the trials were not blinded. We did not find an effect on admission to hospital, disability, worry, additional visits to the physician, or absence from work, but most of these outcomes were poorly studied. We did not find useful results on the number of referrals to specialists, the number of follow-up tests after positive screening results, or the amount of surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

General health checks did not reduce morbidity or mortality, neither overall nor for cardiovascular or cancer causes, although the number of new diagnoses was increased. Important harmful outcomes, such as the number of follow-up diagnostic procedures or short term psychological effects, were often not studied or reported and many trials had methodological problems. With the large number of participants and deaths included, the long follow-up periods used, and considering that cardiovascular and cancer mortality were not reduced, general health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.

Staff perceptions of addressing lifestyle in primary health care: a qualitative evaluation 2 years after the introduction of a lifestyle intervention tool

BACKGROUND

Preventive services and health promotion in terms of lifestyle counselling provided through primary health care (PHC) has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality in the population. Health professionals in general are positive about and willing to develop a health-promoting and/or preventive role. A number of obstacles hindering PHC staff from addressing lifestyle issues have been identified, and one facilitator is the use of modern technology. When a computer-based tool for lifestyle intervention (CLT) was introduced at a number of PHC units in Sweden, this provided an opportunity to study staff perspectives on the subject. The aim of this study was to explore PHC staff's perceptions of handling lifestyle issues, including the consultation situation as well as the perceived usefulness of the CLT.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted after the CLT had been in operation for 2 years. Six focus group interviews, one at each participating unit, including a total of 30 staff members with different professions participated. The interviews were designed to capture perceptions of addressing lifestyle issues, and of using the CLT. Interview data were analysed using manifest content analysis.

RESULTS

Two main themes emerged from the interviews: a challenging task and confidence in handling lifestyle issues. The first theme covered the categories responsibilities and emotions, and the second theme covered the categories first contact, existing tools, and role of the CLT. Staff at the units showed commitment to health promotion/prevention, and saw that patients, caregivers, managers and politicians all have responsibilities regarding the issue. They expressed confidence in handling lifestyle-related conditions, but to a lesser extent had routines for general screening of lifestyle habits, and found addressing alcohol the most problematic issue. The CLT, intended to facilitate screening, was viewed as a complement, but was not considered an important tool for health promotion/prevention.

CONCLUSION

Additional resources, for example in terms of manpower, may help to build the structures necessary for the health promotion/prevention task. Committed leaders could enhance the engagement among staff. Cooperation in multi-professional teams seems to be important, and methods or tools perceived by staff as compatible have a potential to be successfully implemented. Economic incentives rewarding quantity rather than quality appear to be frustrating to PHC staff.

Stimulating preventive procedures in primary care. Effect of PIUPOZ program on the delivery of preventive procedures

INTRODUCTION

Educational meetings are one of the most frequently used strategies to change doctors' professional behavior; however, their effectiveness as a single intervention is limited. This study evaluated the effect of a multifactorial intervention, based on interactive workshops, on the GPs' knowledge and the delivery rates of preventive procedures in primary care.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study population comprised 106 GPs working in the Wielkopolska region recruited to the PIUPOZ program (Improving Quality in Primary Care). The intervention in the program consisted of lectures, interactive workshops and an audit, before and three months after the training. Trained medical students directly observed GPs to register which of 12 studied preventive procedures were performed during the consultation in patients aged 40+.

RESULTS

A total of 1060 consultations were recorded, during which 4899 preventive procedures were delivered: 2115 before and 2784 after workshops. The mean number of preventive procedures per patient before and after workshops was 3.84 and 5.25 respectively (p < 0.0001). The most commonly performed preventive procedures were blood pressure, blood glucose and lipid profile measurement. Mean number of correct answers for 16 questions in the initial knowledge test was 8.7 and 12.7 in the final test (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The observed number of delivered preventive procedures was below the recommended range. Preventive procedures based on laboratory tests were performed more often than lifestyle counseling.

What do we know about who does and does not attend general health checks? Findings from a narrative scoping review

BACKGROUND

General and preventive health checks are a key feature of contemporary policies of anticipatory care. Ensuring high and equitable uptake of such general health checks is essential to ensuring health gain and preventing health inequalities. This literature review explores the socio-demographic, clinical and social cognitive characteristics of those who do and do not engage with general health checks or preventive health checks for cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

An exploratory scoping study approach was employed. Databases searched included the British Nursing Index and Archive, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). Titles and abstracts of 17463 papers were screened; 1171 papers were then independently assessed by two researchers. A review of full text was carried out by two of the authors resulting in 39 being included in the final review.

RESULTS

Those least likely to attend health checks were men on low incomes, low socio-economic status, unemployed or less well educated. In general, attenders were older than non-attenders. An individual's marital status was found to affect attendance rates with non-attenders more likely to be single. In general, white individuals were more likely to engage with services than individuals from other ethnic backgrounds. Non-attenders had a greater proportion of cardiovascular risk factors than attenders, and smokers were less likely to attend than non-smokers. The relationship between health beliefs and health behaviours appeared complex. Non-attenders were shown to value health less strongly, have low self-efficacy, feel less in control of their health and be less likely to believe in the efficacy of health checks.

CONCLUSION

Routine health check-ups appear to be taken up inequitably, with gender, age, socio-demographic status and ethnicity all associated with differential service use. Furthermore, non-attenders appeared to have greater clinical need or risk factors suggesting that differential uptake may lead to sub-optimal health gain and contribute to inequalities via the inverse care law. Appropriate service redesign and interventions to encourage increased uptake among these groups is required.

Quality of cluster randomized controlled trials in oral health: a systematic review of reports published between 2005 and 2009

OBJECTIVES

To assess the quality of methods and reporting of recently published cluster randomized trials (CRTs) in oral health.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for CRTs that included at least one oral health-related outcome and were published from 2005 to 2009 inclusive. We developed a list of criteria for assessing trial quality and reporting. This was influenced largely by the extended CONSORT statement for CRTs but also included criteria suggested by other authors. We examined the extent to which trials were consistent with these criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials were included in the review. In 15 (65%) trials, clustering had been accounted for in sample size calculations, and in 18 (78%) authors had accounted for clustering in analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were reported for eight (35%) trials; the outcome assessor was reported as having been blinded to allocation in 12 (52%) trials; 17 (74%) described eligibility criteria at individual level, but only nine (39%) described such criteria at cluster level. Sixteen of 20 trials (80%), in which individuals were recruited, reported that individual informed consent was obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the quality of recent CRTs in oral health is relatively high and appears to compare favourably with other fields. However, there remains room for improvement. Authors of future trials should endeavour to ensure sample size calculations and analyses properly account for clustering (and are reported as such), consider the potential for recruitment/identification bias at the design stage, describe the steps taken to avoid this in the final report and report observed ICCs and cluster-level eligibility criteria.

Prioritization of evidence-based preventive health services during periodic health examinations

BACKGROUND

Delivery of preventive services sometimes falls short of guideline recommendations.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the multilevel factors associated with evidence-based preventive service delivery during periodic health examinations (PHEs).

METHODS

Primary care physicians were recruited from an integrated delivery system in southeast Michigan. Audio recordings of PHE office visits conducted from 2007 to 2009 were used to ascertain physician recommendation for or delivery of 19 guideline-recommended preventive services. Alternating logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with service delivery. Data analyses were completed in 2011.

RESULTS

Among 484 PHE visits to 64 general internal medicine and family physicians by insured patients aged 50-80 years, there were 2662 services for which patients were due; 54% were recommended or delivered. Regression analyses indicated that the likelihood of service delivery decreased with patient age and with each concern the patient raised, and it increased with increasing BMI and with each additional minute after the scheduled appointment time the physician first presented. The likelihood was greater with patient-physician gender concordance and less if the physician used the electronic medical record in the exam room or had seen the patient in the past 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of patient, patient-physician relationship, and visit contextual factors are associated with preventive service delivery. Additional studies are warranted to understand the complex interplay of factors that support and compromise preventive service delivery.

Delivery of preventive care: the national Canadian Family Physician Cancer and Chronic Disease Prevention Survey

OBJECTIVE

To determine family physicians' practice of, knowledge about, and attitudes toward delivering preventive care during periodic health examinations (PHEs).

DESIGN

A stratified sample of 5013 members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada were randomly selected to receive a questionnaire by mail. Descriptive analysis was performed on a national data set of 1010 respondents.

SETTING

Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A sample of family physicians from each Canadian province.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Physicians were asked questions about whether they addressed aspects of preventive care, such as tobacco smoking, nutrition, physical activity, alcohol intake, and sun exposure with patients during PHEs. The questions were designed to gauge attitudes and identify barriers to the provision of preventive care.

RESULTS

Most respondents (87% to 89%) indicated that they were comfortable counseling their patients about issues such as nutrition, physical activity, and alcohol consumption; however, many of these respondents did not refer their patients to specialists or provide them with additional resources to educate patients about the health risks of their conditions. While tobacco smoking risks and cessation were addressed by most family physicians (79%) during PHEs, other topics, such as sun exposure, were often overlooked.

CONCLUSION

The results of this survey indicate that while many family physicians follow the evidence-based guidelines for preventive care, current levels of preventive care in the primary care setting are below national standards. It is critical that Canadians receive optimal preventive care to improve the outlook of the chronic disease burden on the health care system.

Use of electronic health records to support smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Health information systems such as electronic health records (EHR), computerized decision support systems, and electronic prescribing are potentially valuable components to improve the quality and efficiency of clinical interventions for tobacco use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of electronic health record-facilitated interventions on smoking cessation support actions by clinicians and on patient smoking cessation outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and reference lists and bibliographies of included studies. We searched for studies published between January 1990 and May 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included both randomized studies and non-randomized studies that reported interventions targeting tobacco use through an EHR in health care settings. The intervention could include any use of an EHR to improve smoking status documentation or cessation assistance for patients who use tobacco, either by direct action or by feedback of clinical performance measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Characteristics and content of the interventions, participants, outcomes and methods of the included studies were extracted by one author and checked by a second. Because few randomized studies existed, we did not conduct a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three randomized and eight non-randomized observational studies of fair to good quality that tested the use of an existing EHR to improve documentation and/or treatment of tobacco use. None of the studies included a direct assessment of patient quit rates. Overall, these studies found only modest improvements in some of the recommended clinician actions steps on tobacco use.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At least in the short term, documentation of tobacco status and increased referral to cessation counseling do appear to increase following the introduction of an expectation to use the EHR to record and treat patient tobacco use at medical visits. There is a need for additional research to further understand the effect of EHRs on smoking treatment in healthcare settings.

Effective interventions to facilitate the uptake of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening: an implementation guideline

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. Several high-quality systematic reviews and practice guidelines exist to inform the most effective screening options. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. We developed an implementation guideline to answer the question: What interventions have been shown to increase the uptake of cancer screening by individuals, specifically for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers?

METHODS

A guideline panel was established as part of Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-based Care, and a systematic review of the published literature was conducted. It yielded three foundational systematic reviews and an existing guidance document. We conducted updates of these reviews and searched the literature published between 2004 and 2010. A draft guideline was written that went through two rounds of review. Revisions were made resulting in a final set of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Sixty-six new studies reflecting 74 comparisons met eligibility criteria. They were generally of poor to moderate quality. Using these and the foundational documents, the panel developed a draft guideline. The draft report was well received in the two rounds of review with mean quality scores above four (on a five-point scale) for each of the items. For most of the interventions considered, there was insufficient evidence to support or refute their effectiveness. However, client reminders, reduction of structural barriers, and provision of provider assessment and feedback were recommended interventions to increase screening for at least two of three cancer sites studied. The final guidelines also provide advice on how the recommendations can be used and future areas for research.

CONCLUSION

Using established guideline development methodologies and the AGREE II as our methodological frameworks, we developed an implementation guideline to advise on interventions to increase the rate of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. While advancements have been made in these areas of implementation science, more investigations are warranted.

What implementation interventions increase cancer screening rates? a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. As part of a larger agenda to create an implementation guideline, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate interventions designed to increase the rate of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The interventions considered were: client reminders, client incentives, mass media, small media, group education, one-on-one education, reduction in structural barriers, reduction in out-of-pocket costs, provider assessment and feedback interventions, and provider incentives. Our primary outcome, screening completion, was calculated as the overall median post-intervention absolute percentage point (PP) change in completed screening tests.

METHODS

Our first step was to conduct an iterative scoping review in the research area. This yielded three relevant high-quality systematic reviews. Serving as our evidentiary foundation, we conducted a formal update. Randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized controlled trials, published between 2004 and 2010, were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCHinfo.

RESULTS

The update yielded 66 studies new eligible studies with 74 comparisons. The new studies ranged considerably in quality. Client reminders, small media, and provider audit and feedback appear to be effective interventions to increase the uptake of screening for three cancers. One-on-one education and reduction of structural barriers also appears effective, but their roles with CRC and cervical screening, respectively, are less established. More study is required to assess client incentives, mass media, group education, reduction of out-of-pocket costs, and provider incentive interventions.

CONCLUSION

The new evidence generally aligns with the evidence and conclusions from the original systematic reviews. This review served as the evidentiary foundation for an implementation guideline. Poor reporting, lack of precision and consistency in defining operational elements, and insufficient consideration of context and differences among populations are areas for additional research.

The relationship between office system tools and evidence-based care in primary care physician practice

A number of office system tools have been developed to improve the rates of preventive services and enhance the quality of medical care in practice settings. New approaches to measuring physician adherence to evidence-based standards of treatment, offer a unique opportunity to examine the link between the use of office system tools and evidence-based practices in primary care. Using episode-based profiling measures of adherence as the criterion, results from this investigation suggest that the application of simple physician reminders can be an effective technique for promoting evidence-based treatment. The data also reveal that the influence of health information technology (HIT) resources on adherence was not exclusively positive. Specifically, adherence to evidence-based standards was higher for primary care practices that employed HIT resources judiciously. In contrast, extensive use of personal digital assistants was negatively associated with adherence. Despite concerns directed towards the new generation of episode-based profiling measures, results from this research indicate that the measures behave similarly to traditional measures of quality.

Primary care of adults with developmental disabilities: Canadian consensus guidelines

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2006 Canadian guidelines for primary care of adults with developmental disabilities (DD) and to make practical recommendations based on current knowledge to address the particular health issues of adults with DD.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

Knowledgeable health care providers participating in a colloquium and a subsequent working group discussed and agreed on revisions to the 2006 guidelines based on a comprehensive review of publications, feedback gained from users of the guidelines, and personal clinical experiences. Most of the available evidence in this area of care is from expert opinion or published consensus statements (level III).

MAIN MESSAGE

Adults with DD have complex health issues, many of them differing from those of the general population. Good primary care identifies the particular health issues faced by adults with DD to improve their quality of life, to improve their access to health care, and to prevent suffering, morbidity, and premature death. These guidelines synthesize general, physical, behavioural, and mental health issues of adults with DD that primary care providers should be aware of, and they present recommendations for screening and management based on current knowledge that practitioners can apply. Because of interacting biologic, psychoaffective, and social factors that contribute to the health and well-being of adults with DD, these guidelines emphasize involving caregivers, adapting procedures when appropriate, and seeking input from a range of health professionals when available. Ethical care is also emphasized. The guidelines are formulated within an ethical framework that pays attention to issues such as informed consent and the assessment of health benefits in relation to risks of harm.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the guidelines proposed here would improve the health of adults with DD and would minimize disparities in health and health care between adults with DD and those in the general population.

Improving population care with an integrated electronic panel support tool

This study measured the impact of an electronic Panel Support Tool (PST) on primary care teams' performance on preventive, monitoring, and therapeutic evidence-based recommendations. The PST, tightly integrated with a comprehensive electronic health record, is a dynamic report that identifies gaps in 32 evidence-based care recommendations for individual patients, groups of patients selected by a provider, or all patients on a primary care provider's panel. It combines point-of-care recommendations, disease registry capabilities, and continuous performance feedback for providers. A serial cross-sectional study of the PST's impact on care performance was conducted, retrospectively using monthly summary data for 207 teams caring for 263,509 adult members in Kaiser Permanente's Northwest region. Baseline care performance was assessed 3 months before first PST use and at 4-month intervals over 20 months of follow-up. The main outcome measure was a monthly care performance percentage for each provider, calculated as the number of selected care recommendations that were completed for all patients divided by the number of clinical indications for care recommendations among them. Statistical analysis was performed using the t test and multiple regression. Average baseline care performance on the 13 measures was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.8%-74.0%). During the first 12 months of tool use, performance improved to a statistically significant degree every 4 months. After 20 months of follow-up, it increased to an average of 80.0% (95% CI, 79.3%-80.7%).

Strategies to increase the delivery of smoking cessation treatments in primary care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate evidence-based strategies for increasing the delivery of smoking cessation treatments in primary care clinics.

METHODS

The review included studies published before January 1, 2009. The pooled odds-ratio (OR) was calculated for intervention group versus control group for practitioner performance for "5As" (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist and Arrange) delivery and smoking abstinence. Multi-component interventions were defined as interventions which combined two or more intervention strategies.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials met eligibility criteria. Evidence from multiple large-scale trials was found to support the efficacy of multi-component interventions in increasing "5As" delivery. The pooled OR for multi-component interventions compared to control was 1.79 [95% CI 1.6-2.1] for "ask", 1.6 [95% CI 1.4-1.8] for "advice", 9.3 [95% CI 6.8-12.8] for "assist" (quit date) and 3.5 [95% CI 2.8-4.2] for "assist" (prescribe medications). Evidence was also found to support the value of practice-level interventions in increasing 5As delivery. Adjunct counseling [OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.5-2.0] and multi-component interventions [OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.7-2.8] were found to significantly increase smoking abstinence.

CONCLUSION

Multi-component interventions improve smoking outcomes in primary care settings. Future trials should attempt to isolate which components of multi-component interventions are required to optimize cost-effectiveness.

Are we failing to document adequate smoking histories? A brief review 1999-2009

BACKGROUND

Documenting a detailed smoking history is of obvious importance. Failure to adequately document the smoking history may result in the misdiagnosis and management of asthma, and may be associated with a deficiency of care in patients with cardiovascular disease and several other common diseases.

SCOPE

The purpose of this article is to review the evidence over the past decade that demonstrates inadequate documentation of smoking history. A literature search of English language journals from 1999 to 2009 was completed using several databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS.

FINDINGS

Fourteen studies demonstrated inadequate documentation of smoking histories by primary care clinicians, specialists, residents, and medical students. Failure to document smoking histories was observed in patients with conditions such as heart failure, coronary artery disease, and asthma. Electronic decision support systems and simple medical record reminders were effective in improving the documentation of smoking histories.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to adequately document the smoking history appears to be common. Strategies such as electronic decision support systems are needed to correct this problem in order for patients to receive optimal therapy for their appropriate diagnoses.

Disseminating best-evidence health-care to Indigenous health-care settings and programs in Australia: identifying the gaps

Indigenous Australians experience a disproportionately greater burden of harm from smoking, poor nutrition, alcohol misuse and physical inactivity (SNAP risk factors) than the general Australian population. A critical step in further improving efforts to reduce this harm is to review existing efforts aimed at increasing the uptake of evidence-based interventions in Indigenous-specific health-care settings and programs. This study systematically identifies and reviews published Indigenous-specific dissemination studies targeting SNAP interventions. An electronic search of eight databases and a manual search of reference lists of previous literature reviews were undertaken. Eleven dissemination studies were identified for review: six for nutrition and physical activity as a component of diabetes care, three for alcohol and two for smoking. The majority of studies employed continuing medical education (n = 9 studies), suggesting that improving health-care providers' knowledge and skills is a focus of current efforts to disseminate best-evidence SNAP interventions in Indigenous health-care settings. Only two studies evaluated reminder systems, despite their widespread use in Indigenous-specific health-care services, and only one study employed academic detailing, despite its cost-effectiveness at modifying health-care provider behavior. There is a clear need for more Indigenous-specific dissemination research targeting the uptake of secondary prevention and to establish reliable and valid measures of Indigenous-specific health-care delivery, in order to determine which dissemination strategies are most likely to be effective in Indigenous health-care settings and programs.

Development of an instrument to document the 5A's for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The widely recommended 5A's strategy for brief smoking cessation includes five tasks: Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange. Assessments of the 5A's have been limited to medical-record review and self-report. Using observational data, an instrument to assess the rate at which the 5A's are accomplished was developed.

METHODS

The 5A's Direct Observation Coding scheme (5A-DOC) was developed using published 5A's guidelines and was refined using observed clinician-patient interactions. The development sample consisted of 46 audio-recorded visits of smokers with their physician (n=5), collected in 2000. The 5A-DOC was next applied to a second sample of 131 visits with 28 physicians between 2005 and 2008. Inter-rater reliability was assessed and frequencies reported. Analyses were completed in 2008.

RESULTS

Three observations shaped the development of the 5A-DOC: (1) patients accomplish 5A's tasks; (2) some communication actions accomplish multiple 5A's tasks simultaneously; and (3) sequence is important. Inter-rater agreement for identifying each task was moderate to excellent (kappa=0.58-1.0). When smoking status was established (Ask, n=78), 61% Assessed readiness, and 50% contained Assist. In all, 73% failed to complete the 5A's adequately.

CONCLUSIONS

Accounting for patient activity in smoking-cessation discussions is essential to accurately capture the degree to which the 5A's have been accomplished. The 5A-DOC can be applied to audio or transcript data to reliably assess which of the 5A's tasks have been accomplished. Clinician performance of the 5A's was modest, and findings suggest that clinician training should focus on Assess and the timing of this task, and alignment with patients' reported readiness.