Distributing questionnaires about smoking to patients: impact on general practitioners' recording of smoking advice

Increased Rates of Documented Alcohol Counseling in Primary Care: More Counseling or Just More Documentation?

BACKGROUND

Clinical performance measures often require documentation of patient counseling by healthcare providers. Little is known about whether such measures encourage delivery of counseling or merely its documentation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in provider documentation of alcohol counseling and patient report of receiving alcohol counseling in the Veterans Administration (VA) from 2009 to 2012.

DESIGN

Retrospective time-series analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 5413 men who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use at an outpatient visit and responded to a confidential mailed survey regarding alcohol counseling from a VA provider in the prior year.

MAIN MEASURES

Rates of provider documentation of alcohol counseling in the electronic health record and patient report of such counseling on the survey were assessed over 4 fiscal years. Annual rates were calculated overall and with patients categorized into four mutually exclusive groups based on their own reports of alcohol counseling (yes/no) and whether alcohol counseling was documented by a provider (yes/no).

KEY RESULTS

Provider documentation of alcohol counseling increased 23.6% (95% CI: 17.0, 30.2), from 59.4% to 83.0%, while patient report of alcohol counseling showed no significant change (4.0%, 95% CI: -2.3, 10.3), increasing from 66.1% to 70.1%. An 18.7% (95% CI: 11.7, 25.7) increase in the proportion of patients who reported counseling that was documented by a provider largely reflected a 14.7% decline (95% CI: 8.5, 20.8) in the proportion of patients who reported alcohol counseling that was not documented by a provider. The proportion of patients who did not report counseling but whose providers documented it did not show a significant change (4.9%, 95%CI: 0.0, 9.9).

CONCLUSIONS

If patient report is accurate, increased rates of documented alcohol counseling in the VA from 2009 to 2012 predominantly reflected improved documentation of previously undocumented counseling rather than delivery of additional counseling or increased documentation of counseling that did not meaningfully occur.

Increasing Rates of Tobacco Treatment Delivery in Primary Care Practice: Evaluation of the Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation

PURPOSE

We report on the effectiveness of the Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation (OMSC), a multicomponent knowledge translation intervention, in increasing the rate at which primary care providers delivered smoking cessation interventions using the 3 A's model-Ask, Advise, and Act, and examine clinic-, provider-and patient-level determinants of 3 A's delivery.

METHODS

We examined the effect of the knowledge translation intervention in 32 primary care practices in Ontario, Canada, by assessing a cross-sectional sample of patients before the implementation of the OMSC and a second cross-sectional sample following implementation. We used 3-level modeling (clinic, clinician, patient) to examine the main effects and predictors of 3 A's delivery.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-one primary care clinicians and more than 3,500 tobacco users contributed data to the evaluation. Rates of delivery of the 3 A's increased significantly following program implementation (Ask: 55.3% vs 71.3%, P <.001; Advise: 45.5% vs 63.6%, P <.001; Act: 35.4% vs 54.4%, P <.001). The adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for the delivery of 3 A's between the pre- and post-assessments were AOR = 1.94; (95% CI, 1.61-2.34) for Ask, AOR = 1.92; (95% CI, 1.60-2.29) for Advise, and AOR = 2.03; (95% CI, 1.71-2.42) for Act. The quality of program implementation and the reason for clinic visit were associated with increased rates of 3 A's delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the OMSC was associated with increased rates of smoking cessation treatment delivery. High quality implementation of the OMSC program was associated with increased rates of 3 A's delivery.

The organisation and delivery of health improvement in general practice and primary care: a scoping study

Background

This project examines the organisation and delivery of health improvement activities by and within general practice and the primary health-care team. The project was designed to examine who delivers these interventions, where they are located, what approaches are developed in practices, how individual practices and the primary health-care team organise such public health activities, and how these contribute to health improvement. Our focus was on health promotion and ill-health prevention activities.

Aims

The aim of this scoping exercise was to identify the current extent of knowledge about the health improvement activities in general practice and the wider primary health-care team. The key objectives were to provide an overview of the range and type of health improvement activities, identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further empirical research. Our specific research objectives were to map the range and type of health improvement activity undertaken by general practice staff and the primary health-care team based within general practice; to scope the literature on health improvement in general practice or undertaken by health-care staff based in general practice and identify gaps in the evidence base; to synthesise the literature and identify effective approaches to the delivery and organisation of health improvement interventions in a general practice setting; and to identify the priority areas for research as defined by those working in general practice.

Methods

We undertook a comprehensive search of the literature. We followed a staged selection process involving reviews of titles and abstracts. This resulted in the identification of 1140 papers for data extraction, with 658 of these papers selected for inclusion in the review, of which 347 were included in the evidence synthesis. We also undertook 45 individual and two group interviews with primary health-care staff.

Findings

Many of the research studies reviewed had some details about the type, process or location, or who provided the intervention. Generally, however, little attention is paid in the literature to examining the impact of the organisational context on the way services are delivered or how this affects the effectiveness of health improvement interventions in general practice. We found that the focus of attention is mainly on individual prevention approaches, with practices engaging in both primary and secondary prevention. The range of activities suggests that general practitioners do not take a population approach but focus on individual patients. However, it is clear that many general practitioners see health promotion as an integral part of practice, whether as individual approaches to primary or secondary health improvement or as a practice-based approach to improving the health of their patients. Our key conclusion is that there is currently insufficient good evidence to support many of the health improvement interventions undertaken in general practice and primary care more widely.

Future Research

Future research on health improvement in general practice and by the primary health-care team needs to move beyond clinical research to include delivery systems and be conducted in a primary care setting. More research needs to examine areas where there are chronic disease burdens – cancer, dementia and other disabilities of old age. Reviews should be commissioned that examine the whole prevention pathway for health problems that are managed within primary care drawing together research from general practice, pharmacy, community engagement, etc.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Delivering evidence-based smoking cessation treatment in primary care practice: experience of Ontario family health teams

OBJECTIVE

To report on the delivery of evidence-based smoking cessation treatments (EBSCTs) within a sample of 40 Ontario family health teams (FHTs).

DESIGN

In each FHT, consecutive patients were screened for smoking status and eligible patients completed a questionnaire immediately following their clinic visits (index visits). Multilevel analysis was used to examine FHT-level, provider-level, and patient-level predictors of EBSCT delivery.

SETTING

Forty FHTs in Ontario.

PARTICIPANTS

Across the 40 participating FHTs, 24,033 patients were screened and 2501 eligible patients contributed data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Provider performance in the delivery of EBSCTs during the preceding 12 months and during the index visits was assessed.

RESULTS

The rate of provider delivery of EBSCT for the previous 12 months was 74.0% for the advise strategy. At the index visit, rates of EBSCT strategy delivery were 56.8% for ask; 46.9% for advise; 38.7% for assist; 11.6% for prescribing pharmacotherapy; and 11.3% for arrange follow-up. Significant intra-FHT and intraprovider variability in the rates of EBSCT delivery was identified. Family health teams with a physician champion (odds ratio [OR] 2.0; 95% CI 1.1 to 3.6; P < .01) and providers who highly ranked the importance of smoking cessation (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.7; P < .01) were more likely to deliver EBSCTs. Patient readiness to quit (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.9; P < .001), presence of smoking-related illness (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.1; P < .01), and presenting for an annual health examination (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 2.5; P < .001) were associated with the delivery of EBSCTs.

CONCLUSION

Rates of smoking cessation advice were higher than previously reported for Canadian physicians; however, rates of assistance with quitting were lower. Future quality improvement initiatives should specifically target increasing the rates of screening and advising among low-performing FHTs and providers within FHTs, with a particular emphasis on doing so at all clinic appointments; and improving the rate at which assistance with quitting is delivered.

Effectiveness of telephone-based follow-up support delivered in combination with a multi-component smoking cessation intervention in family practice: a cluster-randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether telephone-based smoking cessation follow-up counseling (FC), when delivered as part of a multi-component intervention program is associated with increased rates of follow-up support and smoking abstinence.

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled-trial was conducted within family medicine practices in Ontario, Canada. Consecutive adult patients who smoked were enrolled at two time points, the baseline period (2009) and the post-intervention period (2009-2011). Smoking abstinence was determined by telephone interview 4 months following enrollment. Both groups implemented a multi-component intervention program. Practices randomized to the FC group could also refer patients to a follow-up support program which involved 5 telephone contacts over a 2-month period.

RESULTS

Eight practices, 130 providers, and 928 eligible patients participated in the study. No statistically significant difference in 7-day point-prevalence abstinence was observed between intervention groups. There was a significant increase in referral to follow-up in both intervention groups. Significantly higher rates of smoking abstinence [25.7% vs. 11.3%; adjusted OR 3.1 (95% CI: 1.1, 8.6), p<0.05] were documented among the twenty-nine percent of FC participants who were referred to the follow-up support program compared to the MC group.

CONCLUSION

Access to external follow-up support did not increase rates at which follow-up support was delivered.

Do financial incentives for delivering health promotion counselling work? Analysis of smoking cessation activities stimulated by the quality and outcomes framework

BACKGROUND

A substantial fraction of UK general practitioners' salaries is now intended to reflect the quality of care provided. This performance-related pay system has probably improved aspects of primary health care but, using the observational data available, disentangling the impacts of different types of targets set within this unique payment system is challenging.

DISCUSSION

Financial incentives undoubtedly influence GPs' activities, however, those aimed at encouraging GPs' delivery of health promotion counselling may not always have the effects intended. There is strong, observational evidence that targets and incentives intended to increase smoking cessation counselling by GPs have merely increased their propensity to record this activity in patients' medical records. The limitations of using financial incentives to stimulate the delivery of counselling in primary care are discussed and a re-appraisal of their use within UK GPs' performance-related pay system is argued for.

SUMMARY

The utility of targets employed by the system for UK General Practitioners' performance related pay may be inappropriate for encouraging the delivery of health promotion counselling interventions. An evaluation of these targets is essential before they are further developed or added to.