1
|
Sykes M, Rosenberg-Yunger ZRS, Quigley M, Gupta L, Thomas O, Robinson L, Caulfield K, Ivers N, Alderson S. Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review. Implement Sci 2024; 19:37. [PMID: 38807219 PMCID: PMC11134935 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-024-01365-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/30/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policymakers and researchers recommend supporting the capabilities of feedback recipients to increase the quality of care. There are different ways to support capabilities. We aimed to describe the content and delivery of feedback facilitation interventions delivered alongside audit and feedback within randomised controlled trials. METHODS We included papers describing feedback facilitation identified by the latest Cochrane review of audit and feedback. The piloted extraction proforma was based upon a framework to describe intervention content, with additional prompts relating to the identification of influences, selection of improvement actions and consideration of priorities and implications. We describe the content and delivery graphically, statistically and narratively. RESULTS We reviewed 146 papers describing 104 feedback facilitation interventions. Across included studies, feedback facilitation contained 26 different implementation strategies. There was a median of three implementation strategies per intervention and evidence that the number of strategies per intervention is increasing. Theory was used in 35 trials, although the precise role of theory was poorly described. Ten studies provided a logic model and six of these described their mechanisms of action. Both the exploration of influences and the selection of improvement actions were described in 46 of the feedback facilitation interventions; we describe who undertook this tailoring work. Exploring dose, there was large variation in duration (15-1800 min), frequency (1 to 42 times) and number of recipients per site (1 to 135). There were important gaps in reporting, but some evidence that reporting is improving over time. CONCLUSIONS Heterogeneity in the design of feedback facilitation needs to be considered when assessing the intervention's effectiveness. We describe explicit feedback facilitation choices for future intervention developers based upon choices made to date. We found the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change to be valuable when describing intervention components, with the potential for some minor clarifications in terms and for greater specificity by intervention providers. Reporting demonstrated extensive gaps which hinder both replication and learning. Feedback facilitation providers are recommended to close reporting gaps that hinder replication. Future work should seek to address the 'opportunity' for improvement activity, defined as factors that lie outside the individual that make care or improvement behaviour possible. REVIEW REGISTRATION The study protocol was published at: https://www.protocols.io/private/4DA5DE33B68E11ED9EF70A58A9FEAC02 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Lisa Robinson
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Karen Caulfield
- Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
McGlacken-Byrne SM, Murphy NP, Barry S. A realist synthesis of multicentre comparative audit implementation: exploring what works and in which healthcare contexts. BMJ Open Qual 2024; 13:e002629. [PMID: 38448042 PMCID: PMC10916097 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002629] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/08/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multicentre comparative clinical audits have the potential to improve patient care, allow benchmarking and inform resource allocation. However, implementing effective and sustainable large-scale audit can be difficult within busy and resource-constrained contemporary healthcare settings. There are little data on what facilitates the successful implementation of multicentre audits. As healthcare environments are complex sociocultural organisational environments, implementing multicentre audits within them is likely to be highly context dependent. OBJECTIVE We aimed to examine factors that were influential in the implementation process of multicentre comparative audits within healthcare contexts-what worked, why, how and for whom? METHODS A realist review was conducted in accordance with the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards reporting standards. A preliminary programme theory informed two systematic literature searches of peer-reviewed and grey literature. The main context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations underlying the implementation processes of multicentre audits were identified and formed a final programme theory. RESULTS 69 original articles were included in the realist synthesis. Four discrete CMO configurations were deduced from this synthesis, which together made up the final programme theory. These were: (1) generating trustworthy data; (2) encouraging audit participation; (3) ensuring audit sustainability; and (4) facilitating audit cycle completion. CONCLUSIONS This study elucidated contexts, mechanisms and outcomes influential to the implementation processes of multicentre or national comparative audits in healthcare. The relevance of these contextual factors and generative mechanisms were supported by established theories of behaviour and findings from previous empirical research. These findings highlight the importance of balancing reliability with pragmatism within complex adaptive systems, generating and protecting human capital, ensuring fair and credible leadership and prioritising change facilitation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nuala P Murphy
- Department of Paediatric Endocrinology, Children's Health Ireland at Temple Street, Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Sarah Barry
- RCSI School of Population Health, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Carter M, Abutheraa N, Ivers N, Grimshaw J, Chapman S, Rogers P, Simeoni M, Antony J, Watson MC. Audit and feedback interventions involving pharmacists to influence prescribing behaviour in general practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fam Pract 2023; 40:615-628. [PMID: 36633309 PMCID: PMC10745261 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmac150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Pharmacists, as experts in medicines, are increasingly employed in general practices and undertake a range of responsibilities. Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are effective in achieving behaviour change, including prescribing. The extent of pharmacist involvement in A&F interventions to influence prescribing is unknown. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of A&F interventions involving pharmacists on prescribing in general practice compared with no A&F/usual care and to describe features of A&F interventions and pharmacist characteristics. METHODS Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, (Social) Science Citation Indexes, ISI Web of Science) were searched (2012, 2019, 2020). Cochrane systematic review methods were applied to trial identification, selection, and risk of bias. Results were summarized descriptively and heterogeneity was assessed. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted where studies were sufficiently homogenous in design and outcome. RESULTS Eleven cluster-randomized studies from 9 countries were included. Risk of bias across most domains was low. Interventions focussed on older patients, specific clinical area(s), or specific medications. Meta-analysis of 6 studies showed improved prescribing outcomes (pooled risk ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.94). Interventions including both verbal and written feedback or computerized decision support for prescribers were more effective. Pharmacists who received study-specific training, provided ongoing support to prescribers or reviewed prescribing for individual patients, contributed to more effective interventions. CONCLUSIONS A&F interventions involving pharmacists can lead to small improvements in evidence-based prescribing in general practice settings. Future implementation of A&F within general practice should compare different ways of involving pharmacists to determine how to optimize effectiveness.PRISMA-compliant abstract included in Supplementary Material 1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Carter
- Department of Life Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| | - Nouf Abutheraa
- School of Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
| | - Noah Ivers
- Women’s College Research Institute, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jeremy Grimshaw
- Centre for Implementation Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sarah Chapman
- Department of Life Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| | - Philip Rogers
- Department of Life Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| | | | - Jesmin Antony
- Women’s College Research Institute, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Margaret C Watson
- Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Laur C, Ladak Z, Hall A, Solbak NM, Nathan N, Buzuayne S, Curran JA, Shelton RC, Ivers N. Sustainability, spread, and scale in trials using audit and feedback: a theory-informed, secondary analysis of a systematic review. Implement Sci 2023; 18:54. [PMID: 37885018 PMCID: PMC10604689 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-023-01312-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2023] [Accepted: 10/05/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Audit and feedback (A&F) is a widely used implementation strategy to influence health professionals' behavior that is often tested in implementation trials. This study examines how A&F trials describe sustainability, spread, and scale. METHODS This is a theory-informed, descriptive, secondary analysis of an update of the Cochrane systematic review of A&F trials, including all trials published since 2011. Keyword searches related to sustainability, spread, and scale were conducted. Trials with at least one keyword, and those identified from a forward citation search, were extracted to examine how they described sustainability, spread, and scale. Results were qualitatively analyzed using the Integrated Sustainability Framework (ISF) and the Framework for Going to Full Scale (FGFS). RESULTS From the larger review, n = 161 studies met eligibility criteria. Seventy-eight percent (n = 126) of trials included at least one keyword on sustainability, and 49% (n = 62) of those studies (39% overall) frequently mentioned sustainability based on inclusion of relevant text in multiple sections of the paper. For spread/scale, 62% (n = 100) of trials included at least one relevant keyword and 51% (n = 51) of those studies (31% overall) frequently mentioned spread/scale. A total of n = 38 studies from the forward citation search were included in the qualitative analysis. Although many studies mentioned the need to consider sustainability, there was limited detail on how this was planned, implemented, or assessed. The most frequent sustainability period duration was 12 months. Qualitative results mapped to the ISF, but not all determinants were represented. Strong alignment was found with the FGFS for phases of scale-up and support systems (infrastructure), but not for adoption mechanisms. New spread/scale themes included (1) aligning affordability and scalability; (2) balancing fidelity and scalability; and (3) balancing effect size and scalability. CONCLUSION A&F trials should plan for sustainability, spread, and scale so that if the trial is effective, the benefits can continue. A deeper empirical understanding of the factors impacting A&F sustainability is needed. Scalability planning should go beyond cost and infrastructure to consider other adoption mechanisms, such as leadership, policy, and communication, that may support further scalability. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered with Prospero in May 2022. CRD42022332606.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celia Laur
- Women's College Hospital Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, 76 Grenville Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada.
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Health Sciences Building, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 425, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.
| | - Zeenat Ladak
- Women's College Hospital Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, 76 Grenville Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6, Canada
| | - Alix Hall
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- National Centre of Implementation Science, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | - Nathan M Solbak
- Physician Learning Program, Continuing Medical Education and Professional Development, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada
- Health Quality Programs, Queen's University, 92 Barrie Street, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada
| | - Nicole Nathan
- School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- National Centre of Implementation Science, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
- Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | - Shewit Buzuayne
- Women's College Hospital Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, 76 Grenville Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada
| | - Janet A Curran
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada
| | - Rachel C Shelton
- Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Noah Ivers
- Women's College Hospital Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, 76 Grenville Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 1B2, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Health Sciences Building, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 425, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Ave, Toronto, M5G 1V7, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Peters S, Sukumar K, Blanchard S, Ramasamy A, Malinowski J, Ginex P, Senerth E, Corremans M, Munn Z, Kredo T, Remon LP, Ngeh E, Kalman L, Alhabib S, Amer YS, Gagliardi A. Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review. Implement Sci 2022; 17:50. [PMID: 35870974 PMCID: PMC9308215 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01223-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Guidelines aim to support evidence-informed practice but are inconsistently used without implementation strategies. Our prior scoping review revealed that guideline implementation interventions were not selected and tailored based on processes known to enhance guideline uptake and impact. The purpose of this study was to update the prior scoping review. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2014 to January 2021 that evaluated guideline implementation interventions. We screened studies in triplicate and extracted data in duplicate. We reported study and intervention characteristics and studies that achieved impact with summary statistics. Results We included 118 studies that implemented guidelines on 16 clinical topics. With regard to implementation planning, 21% of studies referred to theories or frameworks, 50% pre-identified implementation barriers, and 36% engaged stakeholders in selecting or tailoring interventions. Studies that employed frameworks (n=25) most often used the theoretical domains framework (28%) or social cognitive theory (28%). Those that pre-identified barriers (n=59) most often consulted literature (60%). Those that engaged stakeholders (n=42) most often consulted healthcare professionals (79%). Common interventions included educating professionals about guidelines (44%) and information systems/technology (41%). Most studies employed multi-faceted interventions (75%). A total of 97 (82%) studies achieved impact (improvements in one or more reported outcomes) including 10 (40% of 25) studies that employed frameworks, 28 (47.45% of 59) studies that pre-identified barriers, 22 (52.38% of 42) studies that engaged stakeholders, and 21 (70% of 30) studies that employed single interventions. Conclusions Compared to our prior review, this review found that more studies used processes to select and tailor interventions, and a wider array of types of interventions across the Mazza taxonomy. Given that most studies achieved impact, this might reinforce the need for implementation planning. However, even studies that did not plan implementation achieved impact. Similarly, even single interventions achieved impact. Thus, a future systematic review based on this data is warranted to establish if the use of frameworks, barrier identification, stakeholder engagement, and multi-faceted interventions are associated with impact. Trial registration The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/4nxpr) and published in JBI Evidence Synthesis. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01223-6.
Collapse
|
6
|
Muris D, Molenaers M, Nguyen T, Bergmans P, van Acker B, Krekels M, Cals J. Heeft prijsweergave effect op aanvraaggedrag? HUISARTS EN WETENSCHAP 2022; 65:14-17. [PMID: 36091192 PMCID: PMC9440650 DOI: 10.1007/s12445-022-1563-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
Omdat huisartsen steeds meer diagnostiek aanvragen, is zinnig en efficiënt aanvraaggedrag een speerpunt van beleid. Wij onderzochten voor 22 laboratoriumtests of huisartsen minder geneigd waren die test aan te vragen als ze de prijs in beeld kregen. Het totaal aantal aangevraagde tests daalde niet significant, maar het aantal laboratoriumbepalingen die afzonderlijk geprijsd waren, daalde met 6,1%. Dat maakt het aannemelijk dat het zichtbaar beprijzen van laboratoriumkosten wel enig effect heeft op het aanvraaggedrag.
Collapse
|
7
|
Barbazza E, Verheij RA, Ramerman L, Klazinga N, Kringos D. Optimising the secondary use of primary care prescribing data to improve quality of care: a qualitative analysis. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e062349. [PMID: 35863830 PMCID: PMC9310167 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062349] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore available data sources, secondary uses and key considerations for optimising the actionability of primary care prescribing data to improve quality of care in the Dutch context. DESIGN An exploratory qualitative study was undertaken based on semi-structured interviews. We anchored our investigation around three tracer prescription types: antibiotics; benzodiazepines and opioids. Descriptive and explanatory themes were derived from interview data using thematic analysis. SETTING Stakeholders were sampled from across the micro (clinical), meso (organisational) and macro (policy) contexts of the Dutch primary care system. PARTICIPANTS The study involved 28 informants representing general practitioners (GPs), community pharmacists, regional chronic care networks (care groups), academia and research institutes, insurers, professional associations, electronic health record (EHR) vendors and national authorities. RESULTS In the Netherlands, three main sources of data for improving prescribing in primary care are in use: clinical data in the EHRs of GP practices; pharmacy data in community pharmacy databases and claims data of insurers. While the secondary use of pharmacy and claims data is well-established across levels, the use of these data together with EHR data is limited. Important differences in the types of prescribing information needed by micro-meso-macro context are found, though the extent to which current indicators address these varies by prescription type. Five main themes were identified as areas for optimising data use: (1) measuring what matters, (2) increasing data linkages, (3) improving data quality, (4) facilitating data sharing and (5) optimising fit for use analysis. CONCLUSIONS To make primary care prescribing data useful for improving quality, consolidated patient-specific data on the indication for a prescription and dispensed medicine, over time, is needed. In the Netherlands, the selection of indicators requires further prioritisation to better signal the appropriateness and long-term use of prescription drugs. Prioritising data linkages is critical towards more actionable use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erica Barbazza
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert A Verheij
- Learning Health Systems Research Programme, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lotte Ramerman
- Learning Health Systems Research Programme, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Niek Klazinga
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dionne Kringos
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC Locatie AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Liu XL, Wang T, Tan JY, Stewart S, Chan RJ, Eliseeva S, Polotan MJ, Zhao I. Sustainability of healthcare professionals' adherence to clinical practice guidelines in primary care. BMC PRIMARY CARE 2022; 23:36. [PMID: 35232391 PMCID: PMC8889781 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-022-01641-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sustainability of adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) represents an important indicator of the successful implementation in the primary care setting. AIM To explore the sustainability of primary care providers' adherence to CPGs after receiving planned guideline implementation strategies, activities, or programmes. METHODS Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); EMBase; Joanna Briggs Institute; Journals@Ovid; Medline; PsycoINFO; PubMed, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through May 2021 to identify relevant studies. Studies evaluating the sustainability of primary care providers' (PCPs') adherence to CPGs in primary care after any planned guideline implementation strategies, activities, or programmes were included. Two reviewers extracted data from the included studies and assessed methodological quality independently. Narrative synthesis of the findings was conducted. RESULTS Eleven studies were included. These studies evaluated the sustainability of adherence to CPGs related to drug prescribing, disease management, cancer screening, and hand hygiene in primary care. Educational outreach visits, teaching sessions, reminders, audit and feedback, and printed materials were utilized in the included studies as guideline implementation strategies. None of the included studies utilized purpose-designed measurements to evaluate the extent of sustainability. Three studies showed positive sustainability results, three studies showed mixed sustainability results, and four studies reported no significant changes in the sustainability of adherence to CPGs. Overall, it was difficult to quantify the extent to which CPG-based healthcare behaviours were fully sustained based on the variety of results reported in the included studies. CONCLUSION Current guideline implementation strategies may potentially improve the sustainability of PCPs' adherence to CPGs. However, the literature reveals a limited body of evidence for any given guideline implementation strategy. Further research, including the development of a validated purpose-designed sustainability tool, is required to address this important clinical issue. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (No. CRD42021259748 ).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xian-Liang Liu
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
| | - Tao Wang
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
| | - Jing-Yu Tan
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
| | - Simon Stewart
- Torrens University Australia, Wakefield Campus, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia
- University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
| | - Raymond J Chan
- Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, 5042, Australia
| | - Sabina Eliseeva
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
- Thornlands General Practice, 51 Island Outlook Ave Thornlands, Redland, QLD, 4164, Australia
| | - Mary Janice Polotan
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
- Thornlands General Practice, 51 Island Outlook Ave Thornlands, Redland, QLD, 4164, Australia
| | - Isabella Zhao
- College of Nursing and Midwifery, Charles Darwin University, 410 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia.
- Cancer & Palliative Care Outcomes Centre, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, 60 Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Muris DMJ, Molenaers M, Nguyen T, Bergmans PWMP, van Acker BAC, Krekels MME, Cals JWL. Effect of a price display intervention on laboratory test ordering behavior of general practitioners. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE 2021; 22:242. [PMID: 34861828 PMCID: PMC8639847 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-021-01591-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Background Redundant use of diagnostic tests in primary care has shown to be a contributor to rising Dutch healthcare costs. A price display in the test ordering system of the electronic health records (EHRs) could potentially be a low-cost and easy to implement intervention to a decrease in test ordering rate in the primary care setting by creating more cost-awareness among general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a price display for diagnostic laboratory tests in the EHR on laboratory test ordering behavior of GPs in the Westelijke Mijnstreek region in the Netherlands. Methods A pre-post intervention study among 154 GPs working in 57 general practices was conducted from September 2019, until March 2020, in the Netherlands. The intervention consisted of displaying the costs of 22 laboratory tests at the time of ordering. The primary outcome was the mean test ordering rate per 1.000 patients per month, per general practice. Results Test ordering rates were on average rising prior to the intervention. The total mean monthly test order volume showed a non-statistically significant interruption in this rising trend after the intervention, with the mean monthly test ordering rate levelling out from 322.4 to 322.2 (P = 0.86). A subgroup analysis for solely individually priced tests showed a statistically significant decrease in mean monthly test ordering rate after implementation of the price display for the sum of all tests from 67.2 to 63.3 (P = 0.01), as well as for some of these tests individually (i.e. thrombocytes, ALAT, TSH, folic acid). Leucocytes, ESR, vitamin B12, anti-CCP and NT-proBNP also showed a decrease, albeit not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Conclusions Our study suggests that a price display intervention is a simple tool that can alter physicians order behavior and constrain the expanding use of laboratory tests. Future research might consider alternative study designs and a longer follow-up period. Furthermore, in future studies, the combination with a multitude of interventions, like educational programs and feedback strategies, should be studied, while potentially adverse events caused by reduced testing should also be taken into consideration. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01591-w.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennis M J Muris
- MCC Omnes Centre for Diagnostics and Innovation, Sittard, The Netherlands. .,Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Max Molenaers
- Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Trang Nguyen
- Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Mariëlle M E Krekels
- MCC Omnes Centre for Diagnostics and Innovation, Sittard, The Netherlands.,Department of Internal Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Sittard, The Netherlands
| | - Jochen W L Cals
- Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Van Den Bulck S, Spitaels D, Vaes B, Goderis G, Hermens R, Vankrunkelsven P. The effect of electronic audits and feedback in primary care and factors that contribute to their effectiveness: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care 2021; 32:708-720. [PMID: 33057648 DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2020] [Revised: 09/21/2020] [Accepted: 10/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this systematic review was (i) to assess whether electronic audit and feedback (A&F) is effective in primary care and (ii) to evaluate important features concerning content and delivery of the feedback in primary care, including the use of benchmarks, the frequency of feedback, the cognitive load of feedback and the evidence-based aspects of the feedback. DATA SOURCES The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases were searched for articles published since 2010 by replicating the search strategy used in the last Cochrane review on A&F. STUDY SELECTION Two independent reviewers assessed the records for their eligibility, performed the data extraction and evaluated the risk of bias. Our search resulted in 8744 records, including the 140 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the last Cochrane Review. The full texts of 431 articles were assessed to determine their eligibility. Finally, 29 articles were included. DATA EXTRACTION Two independent reviewers extracted standard data, data on the effectiveness and outcomes of the interventions, data on the kind of electronic feedback (static versus interactive) and data on the aforementioned feedback features. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS Twenty-two studies (76%) showed that electronic A&F was effective. All interventions targeting medication safety, preventive medicine, cholesterol management and depression showed an effect. Approximately 70% of the included studies used benchmarks and high-quality evidence in the content of the feedback. In almost half of the studies, the cognitive load of feedback was not reported. Due to high heterogeneity in the results, no meta-analysis was performed. CONCLUSION This systematic review included 29 articles examining electronic A&F interventions in primary care, and 76% of the interventions were effective. Our findings suggest electronic A&F is effective in primary care for different conditions such as medication safety and preventive medicine. Some of the benefits of electronic A&F include its scalability and the potential to be cost effective. The use of benchmarks as comparators and feedback based on high-quality evidence are widely used and important features of electronic feedback in primary care. However, other important features such as the cognitive load of feedback and the frequency of feedback provision are poorly described in the design of many electronic A&F intervention, indicating that a better description or implementation of these features is needed. Developing a framework or methodology for automated A&F interventions in primary care could be useful for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve Van Den Bulck
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - David Spitaels
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Bert Vaes
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Geert Goderis
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Rosella Hermens
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Radboud Institute for Health Science (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, 6500, HB, The Netherlands
| | - Patrik Vankrunkelsven
- Academic Center for General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, blok J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Beaurain C, Thibon P, Fiaux E, Piednoir E, Magnani C, Caron F, Verdon R. General practitioners' clinical practice on the management of cystitis in Normandy, France: A clinical vignettes-based study. J Eval Clin Pract 2021; 27:421-428. [PMID: 32929837 DOI: 10.1111/jep.13464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES The objective was to measure the quality of clinical practice for the management of cystitis in adult women in general practice by collaborating with quality circles and the regional centre for antibiotic counsel. METHOD This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in 2018 in Normandy, France. A questionnaire composed of clinical vignettes was used to evaluate practices of general practitioners (GPs) with regard to cystitis classified into four categories: simple, at risk of complication, recurrent, and caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria. The 2017 French Infectious Diseases Society's guidelines were used as a reference. RESULTS A total of 142 GPs participated in the study (45.5% of the solicited). Fosfomycin-trometamol and pivmecillinam were cited as first-line treatments for simple cystitis by 134 (94%) and 38 (27%) participants, respectively. For at risk of complication cystitis, the treatments cited were cefixime by 64 participants (45%), ofloxacin by 50 (35%), pivmecillinam by 49 (35%), fosfomycin-trometamol by 38 (27%), nitrofurantoin by 36 (25%), and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid by 28 (20%). Mean compliance rates were 85% for simple cystitis, 39% for at risk of complication cystitis, 60% for recurrent cystitis and 14% for cystitis caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria. Two criteria had less than 10% of the compliant answers: comprehensive knowledge of cystitis complication risk factors (9%) and positivity thresholds of urine cultures (10%). CONCLUSIONS In this study, diagnostic means, follow-up testing, and simple cystitis treatment (with fosfomycin predominantly mentioned) were broadly compliant. The use of critical antibiotics was too frequent for at risk of complication cystitis. There may be a need to improve the knowledge of professionals on antibiotic resistance and appropriate antibiotic use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Beaurain
- Centre Régional de Conseil en Antibiothérapie NormAntibio, Caen-Rouen, France.,Université de Caen Normandie, Medical school, Caen, France
| | - Pascal Thibon
- Centre Régional de Conseil en Antibiothérapie NormAntibio, Caen-Rouen, France
| | - Elise Fiaux
- Centre Régional de Conseil en Antibiothérapie NormAntibio, Caen-Rouen, France
| | - Emmanuel Piednoir
- Centre Régional de Conseil en Antibiothérapie NormAntibio, Caen-Rouen, France
| | - Claude Magnani
- Union Régionale des Médecins Libéraux de Normandie, Caen, France
| | - François Caron
- Université de Rouen Normandie, Medical school, Rouen, France.,CHU de Rouen, Service Maladies infectieuses et tropicales, Rouen, France.,Groupe de Recherche sur l'Adaptation Microbienne (GRAM 2.0) Université de Normandie, UNIROUEN, UNICAEN, GRAM 2.0, Rouen, France
| | - Renaud Verdon
- Université de Caen Normandie, Medical school, Caen, France.,CHU de Caen, Service Maladies infectieuses et tropicales, Caen, France.,Groupe de Recherche sur l'Adaptation Microbienne (GRAM 2.0) Université de Normandie, UNICAEN, UNIROUEN, GRAM 2.0, Caen, France
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Høj K, Mygind A, Bro F. Exploring implementation processes in general practice in a feedback intervention aiming to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing: a qualitative study among general practitioners. Implement Sci Commun 2021; 2:4. [PMID: 33413692 PMCID: PMC7792001 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-020-00106-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2020] [Accepted: 12/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has been linked with adverse health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Feedback interventions targeting PIP have shown promising results. However, translation from research to everyday practice remains a challenge. With the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) as overarching framework, we aimed to explore the implementation processes performed by general practices in a real-life, quality improvement intervention using feedback on practice-level prescribing. Methods All 376 general practices in the Central Denmark Region received a prescribing feedback intervention targeting selected types of PIP. Six months later, they received an evaluation questionnaire, to which 45% responded. Among 102 practices reporting to have made changes in response to the intervention, we conducted individual, semi-structured interviews with ten GPs. Maximum variation was sought in terms of baseline prescribing status, implementation activities, practice type and geographical location. The interviews were analysed thematically using NPT. Results The implementation processes in general practice reflected the four NPT constructs. Key motivators for implementation included the GPs’ professional values and interests, but pragmatic considerations were also of importance (coherence). A collective versus an individual approach to the engagement and planning of the implementation process (cognitive participation) was observed. Similarly, a distinction was evident between practice-level actions involving the entire practice team as opposed to individual-level actions performed by the individual GP (collective action). Several challenges to the implementation processes were identified, including patient influences and competing priorities at multiple levels (reflexive monitoring). Additionally, internal evaluation and normalisation of new practices occurred in varying degrees. Conclusion NPT provided a useful framework for understanding implementation processes in general practice. Our results emphasise that clear professional aims and feasible content of interventions are key for GP motivation. This may be ensured through cooperation with GPs’ professional organisation, which may strengthen intervention legitimacy and uptake. Two main implementation strategies were identified: practice-level and GP-level strategies. Intervention developers need to recognise both strategies to deliver intervention content and implementation support that promote sustainable improvements in prescribing practice. Competing demands and patient influences remain important challenges that need to be addressed in future studies to further facilitate the reduction of PIPs. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-020-00106-5.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kirsten Høj
- Research Unit for General Practice, Bartholins Allé 2, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.
| | - Anna Mygind
- Research Unit for General Practice, Bartholins Allé 2, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark
| | - Flemming Bro
- Research Unit for General Practice, Bartholins Allé 2, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.,Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2020; 70:e858-e865. [PMID: 33199293 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20x713693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2020] [Accepted: 06/03/2020] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is recognised that medical tests are overused in primary care; however, it is unclear how best to reduce their use. AIM To identify which strategies are effective in reducing the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic review. METHOD The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Rx for Change were searched (January 1990 to November 2019) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. Two reviewers selected eligible RCTs, extracted data, and assessed their risk of bias. RESULTS Of the 16 RCTs included in the review, 11 reported a statistically significant reduction in the use of low-value medical tests. The median of the differences between the relative reductions in the intervention and control arms was 17% (interquartile range 12% to 24%). Strategies using reminders or audit/feedback showed larger reduction than those without these components (22% versus 14%, and 22% versus 13%, respectively) and patient-targeted strategies showed larger reductions than those not targeted at patients (51% versus 17%). Very few studies investigated the sustainability of the effect, adverse events, cost-effectiveness, or patient-reported outcomes related to reducing the use of low-value tests. CONCLUSION This review indicates that it is possible to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care, especially by using multiple components including reminders, audit/feedback, and patient-targeted interventions. To implement these strategies widely in primary care settings, more research is needed not only to investigate their effectiveness, but also to examine adverse events, cost-effectiveness, and patient-reported outcomes.
Collapse
|
14
|
Cotterill S, Tang MY, Powell R, Howarth E, McGowan L, Roberts J, Brown B, Rhodes S. Social norms interventions to change clinical behaviour in health workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2020. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr08410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background
A social norms intervention seeks to change the clinical behaviour of a target health worker by exposing them to the values, beliefs, attitudes or behaviours of a reference group or person. These low-cost interventions can be used to encourage health workers to follow recommended professional practice.
Objective
To summarise evidence on whether or not social norms interventions are effective in encouraging health worker behaviour change, and to identify the most effective social norms interventions.
Design
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Data sources
The following databases were searched on 24 July 2018: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to week 2 July 2018), EMBASE (1974 to 3 July 2018), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1937 to July 2018), British Nursing Index (2008 to July 2018), ISI Web of Science (1900 to present), PsycINFO (1806 to week 3 July 2018) and Cochrane trials (up to July 2018).
Participants
Health workers took part in the study.
Interventions
Behaviour change interventions based on social norms.
Outcome measures
Health worker clinical behaviour, for example prescribing (primary outcome), and patient health outcomes, for example blood test results (secondary), converted into a standardised mean difference.
Methods
Titles and abstracts were reviewed against the inclusion criteria to exclude any that were clearly ineligible. Two reviewers independently screened the remaining full texts to identify relevant papers. Two reviewers extracted data independently, coded for behaviour change techniques and assessed quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We performed a meta-analysis and presented forest plots, stratified by behaviour change technique. Sources of variation were explored using metaregression and network meta-analysis.
Results
A total of 4428 abstracts were screened, 477 full texts were screened and findings were based on 106 studies. Most studies were in primary care or hospitals, targeting prescribing, ordering of tests and communication with patients. The interventions included social comparison (in which information is given on how peers behave) and credible source (which refers to communication from a well-respected person in support of the behaviour). Combined data suggested that interventions that included social norms components were associated with an improvement in health worker behaviour of 0.08 standardised mean differences (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.10 standardised mean differences) (n = 100 comparisons), and an improvement in patient outcomes of 0.17 standardised mean differences (95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.20) (n = 14), on average. Heterogeneity was high, with an overall I
2 of 85.4% (primary) and 91.5% (secondary). Network meta-analysis suggested that three types of social norms intervention were most effective, on average, compared with control: credible source (0.30 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.47); social comparison combined with social reward (0.39 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.64); and social comparison combined with prompts and cues (0.33 standardised mean differences, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.44).
Limitations
The large number of studies prevented us from requesting additional information from authors. The trials varied in design, context and setting, and we combined different types of outcome to provide an overall summary of evidence, resulting in a very heterogeneous review.
Conclusions
Social norms interventions are an effective method of changing clinical behaviour in a variety of health service contexts. Although the overall result was modest and very variable, there is the potential for social norms interventions to be scaled up to target the behaviour of a large population of health workers and resulting patient outcomes.
Future work
Development of optimised credible source and social comparison behaviour change interventions, including qualitative research on acceptability and feasibility.
Study registration
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016045718.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Cotterill
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Mei Yee Tang
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Rachael Powell
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Elizabeth Howarth
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Laura McGowan
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Jane Roberts
- Outreach and Evidence Search Service, Library and E-learning Service, Northern Care Alliance, NHS Group, Royal Oldham Hospital, Oldham, UK
| | - Benjamin Brown
- Health e-Research Centre, Farr Institute for Health Informatics Research, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Centre for Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Sarah Rhodes
- Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ten-Year Follow-Up of Clinical Governance Implementation in Primary Care: Improving Screening, Diagnosis and Control of Cardiovascular Risk Factors. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2019; 16:ijerph16214299. [PMID: 31694294 PMCID: PMC6862228 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16214299] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2019] [Revised: 11/02/2019] [Accepted: 11/04/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Current improvement strategies for the control of cardiovascular risk factors (CRFs) in Europe are based on quality management policies. With the aim of understanding the effect of interventions delivered by primary healthcare systems, we evaluated the impact of clinical governance on cardiovascular health after ten years of implementation in Catalonia. A cohort study that included 1878 patients was conducted in 19 primary care centres (PCCs). Audits that comprised 13 cardiovascular health indicators were performed and general practitioners received periodic (annual, biannual or monthly) feedback about their clinical practice. We evaluated improvement in screening, diagnosis and control of the main CRFs and the effects of the feedback on cardiovascular risk (CR), incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality, comparing baseline data with data at the end of the study (after a 10-year follow-up). The impact of the intervention was assessed globally and with respect to feedback frequency. General improvement was observed in screening, percentage of diagnoses and control of CRFs. At the end of the study, few clinically significant differences in CRFs were observed between groups. However, the reduction in CR was greater in the group receiving high frequency feedback, specifically in relation to smoking and control of diabetes and cholesterol (Low Density Lipoprotein (LDL) and High Density Lipoprotein (HDL)). A protective effect of having a cardiovascular event (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.44-0.94) or death (HR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.35-0.88) was observed in patients from centres where general practitioners received high frequency feedback. Additionally, these PCCs presented improved cardiovascular health indicators and lower incidence and mortality by CVD, illustrating the impact of this intervention.
Collapse
|
16
|
Duddy C, Wong G. Explaining variations in test ordering in primary care: protocol for a realist review. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e023117. [PMID: 30209159 PMCID: PMC6144329 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2018] [Revised: 06/29/2018] [Accepted: 08/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Studies have demonstrated the existence of significant variation in test-ordering patterns in both primary and secondary care, for a wide variety of tests and across many health systems. Inconsistent practice could be explained by differing degrees of underuse and overuse of tests for diagnosis or monitoring. Underuse of appropriate tests may result in delayed or missed diagnoses; overuse may be an early step that can trigger a cascade of unnecessary intervention, as well as being a source of harm in itself. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This realist review will seek to improve our understanding of how and why variation in laboratory test ordering comes about. A realist review is a theory-driven systematic review informed by a realist philosophy of science, seeking to produce useful theory that explains observed outcomes, in terms of relationships between important contexts and generative mechanisms.An initial explanatory theory will be developed in consultation with a stakeholder group and this 'programme theory' will be tested and refined against available secondary evidence, gathered via an iterative and purposive search process. This data will be analysed and synthesised according to realist principles, to produce a refined 'programme theory', explaining the contexts in which primary care doctors fail to order 'necessary' tests and/or order 'unnecessary' tests, and the mechanisms underlying these decisions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval is not required for this review. A complete and transparent report will be produced in line with the RAMESES standards. The theory developed will be used to inform recommendations for the development of interventions designed to minimise 'inappropriate' testing. Our dissemination strategy will be informed by our stakeholders. A variety of outputs will be tailored to ensure relevance to policy-makers, primary care and pathology practitioners, and patients. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42018091986.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Duddy
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK
| | - Geoffrey Wong
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Hueth KD, Jackson BR, Schmidt RL. An Audit of Repeat Testing at an Academic Medical Center: Consistency of Order Patterns With Recommendations and Potential Cost Savings. Am J Clin Pathol 2018; 150:27-33. [PMID: 29718090 DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/aqy020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the prevalence of potentially unnecessary repeat testing (PURT) and the associated economic burden for an inpatient population at a large academic medical facility. METHODS We evaluated all inpatient test orders during 2016 for PURT by comparing the intertest times to published recommendations. Potential cost savings were estimated using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services maximum allowable reimbursement rate. We evaluated result positivity as a determinant of PURT through logistic regression. RESULTS Of the evaluated 4,242 repeated target tests, 1,849 (44%) were identified as PURT, representing an estimated cost-savings opportunity of $37,376. Collectively, the association of result positivity and PURT was statistically significant (relative risk, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.3; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS PURT contributes to unnecessary health care costs. We found that a small percentage of providers account for the majority of PURT, and PURT is positively associated with result positivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle D Hueth
- Department of Pathology, Health Sciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Brian R Jackson
- Department of Pathology, Health Sciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Robert L Schmidt
- Department of Pathology, Health Sciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Beyond quality improvement: exploring why primary care teams engage in a voluntary audit and feedback program. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17:803. [PMID: 29197382 PMCID: PMC5712172 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2765-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2017] [Accepted: 11/24/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Despite its popularity, the effectiveness of audit and feedback in support quality improvement efforts is mixed. While audit and feedback-related research efforts have investigated issues relating to feedback design and delivery, little attention has been directed towards factors which motivate interest and engagement with feedback interventions. This study explored the motivating factors that drove primary care teams to participate in a voluntary audit and feedback initiative. Methods Interviews were conducted with leaders of primary care teams who had participated in at least one iteration of the audit and feedback program. This intervention was developed by an organization which advocates for high-quality, team-based primary care in Ontario, Canada. Interview transcripts were coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the resulting framework was analyzed inductively to generate key themes. Results Interviews were completed with 25 individuals from 18 primary care teams across Ontario. The majority were Executive Directors (14), Physician leaders (3) and support staff for Quality Improvement (4). A range of motivations for participating in the audit and feedback program beyond quality improvement were emphasized. Primarily, informants believed that the program would eventually become a best-in-class audit and feedback initiative. This reflected concerns regarding existing initiatives in terms of the intervention components and intentions as well as the perception that an initiative by primary care, for primary care would better reflect their own goals and better support desired patient outcomes. Key enablers included perceived obligations to engage and provision of support for the work involved. No teams cited an evidence base for A&F as a motivating factor for participation. Conclusions A range of motivating factors, beyond quality improvement, contributed to participation in the audit and feedback program. Findings from this study highlight that efforts to understand how and when the intervention works best cannot be limited to factors within developers’ control. Clinical teams may more readily engage with initiatives with the potential to address their own long-term system goals. Aligning motivations for participation with the goals of the audit and feedback initiative may facilitate both engagement and impact. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-017-2765-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|