Changes in receptionists' attitudes towards involvement in a general practice-based trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention.

BACKGROUND: Primary health care receptionists are increasingly expected to be involved in research. However, little is known about receptionists' attitudes to research or health programmes. AIM: To examine changes in receptionists' attitudes, with different levels of training and support, towards involvement in a general practice-based trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention. METHOD: Subjects were 84 receptionists, one per practice, who assisted in the implementation of a screening and brief alcohol intervention programme. Receptionists were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: control (no training or support), training alone, and training plus ongoing telephone support. Baseline and follow-up questionnaires were used to assess changes in receptionists' attitudes. RESULTS: Of 40 items that measured receptionists' attitudes to involvement in the programme, 70% had deteriorated after three months, 20% significantly so. There was no effect of training and support condition. Receptionists' and GPs' attitudes to research and health programmes conflicted. CONCLUSION: Receptionists developed more negative views about involvement in research and health programmes over the three-month study period, regardless of level of training and support.

A randomized trial of three marketing strategies to disseminate a screening and brief alcohol intervention programme to general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Research findings are of little benefit to patients or society if they do not reach the audience they are intended to influence. A dissemination strategy is needed to target new findings at its user group and encourage a process of consideration and adoption or rejection. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different marketing strategies for the dissemination of a screening and brief alcohol intervention (SBI) programme to general practitioners (GPs). METHOD: Seven hundred and twenty-nine GPs, one per practice, from the former Northern and Yorkshire Regional Health Authority were randomly assigned to one of three marketing strategies: postal marketing (mailing a promotional brochure to GPs), telemarketing (following a script to market the programme over the telephone), and personal marketing (following the same script during face-to-face marketing at GPs' practices). GPs who took up the programme were asked if they would agree to use it. Outcome measures included the proportions of GPs who took up the programme and agreement to use it. RESULTS: Of the 614 GPs eligible for the study, 321 (52%) took the programme. There was a significant difference in the proportions of GPs from the three marketing strategies who took the programme (82% telemarketing, 68% personal marketing, and 22% postal marketing). Of the 315 GPs who took the programme and were eligible to use it, 128 (41%) agreed to use the programme for three months. GPs in the postal marketing group were more likely to agree to use the programme (55% postal marketing, 44% personal marketing, and 34% telemarketing). Personal marketing was the most effective overall dissemination strategy; however, economic analysis revealed that telemarketing was the most cost-effective strategy. Costs for dissemination per GP were: 13 Pounds telemarketing, 15 Pounds postal marketing, and 88 Pounds personal marketing. CONCLUSION: Telemarketing appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy for dissemination of SBI to GPs.

A RCT of three training and support strategies to encourage implementation of screening and brief alcohol intervention by general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Providing doctors with new research findings or clinical guidelines is rarely sufficient to promote changes in clinical practice. An implementation strategy is required to provide clinicians with the skills and encouragement needed to alter established routines. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different training and support strategies in promoting implementation of screening and brief alcohol intervention (SBI) by general practitioners (GPs). METHOD: Subjects were 128 GPs, one per practice, from the former Northern and Yorkshire Regional Health Authority, who agreed to use the 'Drink-Less' SBI programme in an earlier dissemination trial. GPs were stratified by previous marketing conditions and randomly allocated to three intensities of training and support: controls (n = 43) received the programme with written guidelines only, trained GPs (n = 43) received the programme plus practice-based training in programme usage, trained and supported GPs (n = 42) received the programme plus practice-based training and a support telephone call every two weeks. GPs were requested to use the programme for three months. Outcome measures included proportions of GPs implementing the programme and numbers of patients screened and intervened with. RESULTS: Seventy-three (57%) GPs implemented the programme and screened 11,007 patients for risk drinking. Trained and supported GPs were significantly more likely to implement the programme (71%) than controls (44%) or trained GPs (56%); they also screened, and intervened with, significantly more patients. Costs per patient screened were: trained and supported GPs, 1.05 Pounds; trained GPs, 1.08 Pounds; and controls, 1.47 Pounds. Costs per patient intervened with were: trained and supported GPs, 5.43 Pounds; trained GPs, 6.02 Pounds; and controls, 8.19 Pounds. CONCLUSION: Practice-based training plus support telephone calls was the most effective and cost-effective strategy to encourage implementation of SBI by GPs.

Patient and practitioner characteristics predict brief alcohol intervention in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of an evidence-based health care intervention depends on it being delivered consistently to appropriate patients. Brief alcohol intervention is known to be effective at reducing excessive drinking and its concomitant health and social problems. However, a recent implementation trial reported partial delivery of brief alcohol intervention by general practitioners (GPs) which is likely to have reduced its impact. AIM: To investigate patient-practitioner characteristics influencing brief alcohol intervention in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional analysis of 12,814 completed Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) screening questionnaires. SETTING: Eighty-four GPs who had implemented a brief alcohol intervention programme in a previous trial based in the Northeast of England. METHOD: GPs were requested to screen all adults (aged over 16 years) presenting to their surgery and follow a structured protocol to give a brief intervention (five minutes of advice plus an information booklet) to all 'risk' drinkers. Anonymized carbon copies of the screening questionnaire were collected from all practices after a three-month implementation period. RESULTS: Although AUDIT identified 4080 'risk' drinkers, only 2043 (50%) received brief intervention. Risk drinkers that were most likely to receive brief intervention were males (58%), unemployed (61%), and technically-trained patients (55%). Risk drinkers that were least likely to receive brief intervention were females (44%), students (38%), and university educated patients (46%). Logistic regression modelling showed that patients' risk status was the most influential predictor of brief intervention. Also, GPs' experience of relevant training and longer average practice consultations predicted brief intervention. However, personal characteristics relating to patients and GPs also predicted brief intervention in routine practice. CONCLUSION: Interpersonal factors relating to patients and practitioners contributed to the selective provision of brief alcohol intervention in primary care. Ways should be found to remedy this situation or the impact of this evidence-based intervention may be reduced when implemented in routine practice.

Our Healthier Nation: are general practitioners willing and able to deliver? A survey of attitudes to and involvement in health promotion and lifestyle counselling.

BACKGROUND: The recent Green Paper, Our Healthier Nation, identifies professional advice on healthier living as a key component of its national contract for health. General practitioners (GPs) are ideally placed for this work. However, previous research has reported a discrepancy between patients' expectations of lifestyle advice from GPs and their receipt of such advice. AIMS: To describe GPs' current attitudes to and involvement in health promotion and lifestyle counselling, and to track changes in these areas over recent years. METHOD: A postal questionnaire survey of a random sample of 430 GPs, one per practice, from all general practices in Leicestershire, Derbyshire, and Nottinghamshire. GPs who had not responded after two weeks received a reminder telephone call plus two follow-up questionnaires. RESULTS: Four hundred and eleven GPs were eligible for the survey, which yielded a response rate of 68% (n = 279). GPs reported spending an average 16% of practice time on prevention and 79% reported educating patients about lifestyle risk 'most' or 'all of the time'. Solo GPs spent more time on prevention than GPs from group practices. Most enquiries and interventions related to smoking behaviour. GPs felt most effective in changing patients' use of prescription drugs, and the largest reported difference between current and potential effectiveness in helping patient change lifestyle behaviour, after information and training, related to reducing alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increasing workload, GPs remain positive about health promotion and lifestyle counselling. Over the past 10 years, there has been an increase in routine enquiries about lifestyle behaviour, but confidence about effectiveness in helping patients changes lifestyle behaviour remains low. More training and support concerning lifestyle intervention is required by GPs in order for them to contribute effectively to the Government's health promotion programme.

Use of marketing to disseminate brief alcohol intervention to general practitioners: promoting health care interventions to health promoters.

Health research findings are of little benefit to patients or society if they do not reach the audience they are intended to influence. Thus, a dissemination strategy is needed to target new findings at its user group and encourage a process of consideration and adoption or rejection. Social marketing techniques can be utilized to aid successful dissemination of research findings and to speed the process by which new information reaches practice. Principles of social marketing include manipulating the marketing mix of product, price, place and promotion. This paper describes the development of a marketing approach and the outcomes from a trial evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of manipulating promotional strategies to disseminate actively a screening and brief alcohol intervention (SBI) programme to general practitioners (GPs). The promotional strategies consisted of postal marketing, telemarketing and personal marketing. The study took place in general practices across the Northern and Yorkshire Regional Health Authority. Of the 614 GPs eligible for the study, one per practice, 321 (52%) took the programme and of those available to use it for 3 months (315), 128 (41%) actively considered doing so, 73 (23%) actually went on to use it. Analysis of the specific impact of the three different promotional strategies revealed that while personal marketing was the most effective overall dissemination and implementation strategy, telemarketing was more cost-effective. The findings of our work show that using a marketing approach is promising for conveying research findings to GPs and in particular a focus on promotional strategies can facilitate high levels of uptake and consideration in this target group.

Intervention for excessive alcohol consumption in primary health care: attitudes and practices of English general practitioners.

General practitioners' (GPs') recognition of, attitudes towards, and intervention for, excessive drinking and alcohol problems among their patients were assessed in a postal questionnaire survey. Levels of recognition of, and intervention for, excessive drinking by GPs were low. GPs did not routinely enquire about alcohol and had managed only small numbers of patients specifically for excessive drinking or alcohol problems in the previous year. Enquiry about alcohol issues was elicited mainly by physical symptoms or by new patient registrations. Although 83% of GPs felt prepared to counsel excessive drinkers, only 21% felt effective in helping patients reduce consumption. Over the past 10 years, there appears to have been an increase in numbers of GPs who feel that they should be working with alcohol issues, but fewer GPs perceive themselves as being effective in this work. The main barriers to brief alcohol intervention were given as insufficient time and training, and lack of help from government policy; the main incentives related to availability of appropriate support services and proven efficacy of brief interventions.