A clustered randomized trial of the effects of feedback using academic detailing compared to postal bulletin on prescribing of preventative cardiovascular therapy.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Interventions to promote prescribing of preventive therapies in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or diabetes have reported variable success. OBJECTIVE: (i) To evaluate the effect of prescribing feedback on GP practice using academic detailing compared to postal bulletin on prescribing of CVD preventive therapies in patients with CVD or diabetes at 3 and 6 months post intervention and (ii) to evaluate the intervention from a GP's perspective. METHODS: Volunteer GP practices (n = 98) were randomized to receive individualized prescribing feedback via academic detailing (postal bulletin plus outreach visit) (n = 48) or postal bulletin (n = 50). The proportion of CVD or diabetic patients on statins and antiplatelet agents/warfarin pre- and post-intervention was calculated for each GP practice. Multivariate regression with a random effects model was used to compare differences between the groups adjusting for GP clustering and confounding factors. beta-Coefficients and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented. RESULTS: There was a 3% increase in statin prescribing in CVD patients at 6 months post-intervention for both randomized groups, but there was no statistical difference between the groups (beta = 0.004; 95% CI = -0.01 to 0.02). Statin and antiplatelet/warfarin prescribing also increased in the diabetic population; there was no significant differences between the groups. GPs participating in the project expressed a high level of satisfaction with both interventions. CONCLUSION: Prescribing of preventive therapies increased in both randomized groups over the study period. But academic detailing did not have an additional effect on changing prescribing over the postal bulletin alone.