Effect of audit and feedback with peer review on general practitioners' prescribing and test ordering performance: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Much research worldwide is focussed on cost containment and better adherence to guidelines in healthcare. The research focussing on professional behaviour is often performed in a well-controlled research setting. In this study a large-scale implementation of a peer review strategy was tested on both test ordering and prescribing behaviour in primary care in the normal quality improvement setting. METHODS: We planned a cluster-RCT in existing local quality improvement collaboratives (LQICs) in primary care. The study ran from January 2008 to January 2011. LQICs were randomly assigned to one of two trial arms, with each arm receiving the same intervention of audit and feedback combined with peer review. Both arms were offered five different clinical topics and acted as blind controls for the other arm. The differences in test ordering rates and prescribing rates between both arms were analysed in an intention-to-treat pre-post analysis and a per-protocol analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one LQIC groups, including 197 GPs working in 88 practices, entered the trial. The intention-to-treat analysis did not show a difference in the changes in test ordering or prescribing performance between intervention and control groups. The per-protocol analysis showed positive results for half of the clinical topics. The increase in total tests ordered was 3% in the intervention arm and 15% in the control arm. For prescribing the increase in prescriptions was 20% in the intervention arm and 66% in the control group. It was observed that the groups with the highest baseline test ordering and prescription volumes showed the largest improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the results from earlier work could not be confirmed by our attempt to implement the strategy in the field. We did not see a decrease in the volumes of tests ordered or of the drugs prescribed but were able to show a lesser increase instead. Implementing the peer review with audit and feedback proved to be not feasible in primary care in the Netherlands. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at the Dutch trial register under number ISRCTN40008171 on August 7th 2007.

Evaluation of an effective multifaceted implementation strategy for elective single-embryo transfer after in vitro fertilization.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the relationship between the rate of elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) and couples' exposure to different elements of a multifaceted implementation strategy? SUMMARY ANSWER: Additional elements in a multifaceted implementation strategy do not result in an increased eSET rate. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A multifaceted eSET implementation strategy with four different elements is effective in increasing the eSET rate by 11%. It is unclear whether every strategy element contributes equally to the strategy's effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN AND SIZE: An observational study was performed among 222 subfertile couples included in a previously performed randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS, SETTINGS AND METHODS: Of the 222 subfertile couples included, 109 couples received the implementation strategy and 113 couples received standard IVF care. A multivariate regression analysis assessed the effectiveness of four different strategy elements on the decision about the number embryos to be transferred. Questionnaires evaluated the experiences of couples with the different elements. MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the couples who received the implementation strategy, almost 50% (52/109) were exposed to all the four elements of the strategy. The remaining 57 couples who received two or three elements of the strategy could be divided into two further classes of exposure. Our analysis demonstrated that additional elements do not result in an increased eSET rate. In addition to the physician's advice, couples rated a decision aid and a counselling session as more important for their decision to transfer one or two embryos, compared with a phone call and a reimbursement offer (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS AND REASONS FOR CAUTION: The differences in eSET rate between exposure groups failed to reach significance, probably because of the small numbers of couples in each exposure group. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Adding more elements to an implementation strategy does not always result in an increased effectiveness, which is in concordance with recent literature. This in-depth evaluation of a multifaceted intervention strategy could therefore help to modify strategies, by making them more effective and less expensive.

Guideline adherence is worth the effort: a cost-effectiveness analysis in intrauterine insemination care.

STUDY QUESTION: Is optimal adherence to guideline recommendations in intrauterine insemination (IUI) care cost-effective from a societal perspective when compared with suboptimal adherence to guideline recommendations? SUMMARY ANSWER: Optimal guideline adherence in IUI care has substantial economic benefits when compared with suboptimal guideline adherence. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Fertility guidelines are tools to help health-care professionals, and patients make better decisions about clinically effective, safe and cost-effective care. Up to now, there has been limited published evidence about the association between guideline adherence and cost-effectiveness in fertility care. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In a retrospective cohort study involving medical record analysis and a patient survey (n = 415), interviews with staff members (n = 13) and a review of hospitals' financial department reports and literature, data were obtained about patient characteristics, process aspects and clinical outcomes of IUI care and resources consumed. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, restricted to four relevant guideline recommendations, the ongoing pregnancy rate per couple (effectiveness), the average medical and non-medical costs of IUI care, possible additional IVF treatment, pregnancy, delivery and period from birth up to 6 weeks after birth for both mother and offspring per couple (costs) and the incremental net monetary benefits were calculated to investigate if optimal guideline adherence is cost-effective from a societal perspective when compared with suboptimal guideline adherence. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Seven hundred and sixty five of 1100 randomly selected infertile couples from the databases of the fertility laboratories of 10 Dutch hospitals, including 1 large university hospital providing tertiary care and 9 public hospitals providing secondary care, were willing to participate, but 350 couples were excluded because of ovulatory disorders or the use of donated spermatozoa (n = 184), still ongoing IUI treatment (n = 143) or no access to their medical records (n = 23). As a result, 415 infertile couples who started a total of 1803 IUI cycles were eligible for the cost-effectiveness analyses. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Optimal adherence to the guideline recommendations about sperm quality, the total number of IUI cycles and dose of human chorionic gonadotrophin was cost-effective with an incremental net monetary benefit between € 645 and over € 7500 per couple, depending on the recommendation and assuming a willingness to pay € 20 000 for an ongoing pregnancy. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Because not all recommendations applied to all 415 included couples, smaller groups were left for some of the cost-effectiveness analyses, and one integrated analysis with all recommendations within one model was impossible. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Optimal guideline adherence in IUI care has substantial economic benefits when compared with suboptimal guideline adherence. For Europe, where over 144,000 IUI cycles are initiated each year to treat ≈ 32 000 infertile couples, this could mean a possible cost saving of at least 20 million euro yearly. Therefore, it is valuable to make an effort to improve guideline development and implementation.

Nurse telephone triage: good quality associated with appropriate decisions.

BACKGROUND: Triage at out-of-hours GP cooperatives (GPCs) is aimed at determining medical urgency and guiding decisions. Both medical knowledge and communication skills are required for this complex task. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of quality of consultation and estimated urgency on the appropriateness of decisions. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of telephone triage consultations by nurses at 29 Dutch GPCs. Consultations were taped and assessed by trained observers, using a validated instrument. Measures concerned quality of consultation, nurse-estimated urgency (four levels) and appropriateness of decisions (urgency, follow-up advice and timing). Bivariate analyses and logistic multilevel regression analyses were used to explore the impact of quality of consultation (controlling for urgency) on appropriateness of decisions. RESULTS: The sample included 6739 telephone contacts, most of which (90%) were non-urgent. The majority of decisions were appropriate (91% for urgency, 96% for follow-up advice and 95% for timing). In bivariate analyses, appropriateness of decisions was positively related to higher quality of consultation. Estimated urgency was negatively associated with quality of consultation. Logistic multilevel analysis showed that higher quality of consultation was related to a more appropriate estimation of urgency [odds ratio (OR) = 1.82; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.69-1.95], follow-up advice (OR = 2.69; 95% CI: 2.41-3.01) and timing of decisions (OR = 2.41; 95% CI: 2.20-2.63). CONCLUSIONS: High quality of consultation has a positive, but small, impact on the appropriateness of decisions. Quality of consultation needs to be targeted in training and support of triage nurses, especially when it concerns highly urgent contacts.

A review of strategies to stimulate dental professionals to integrate smoking cessation interventions into primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise evidence regarding the effectiveness of various implementation strategies to stimulate the delivery of smoking cessation advice and support during daily dental care. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: Search of online medical and psychological databases, correspondence with authors and checking of reference lists. Only studies were selected which examined a support strategy to promote tobacco use cessation having a component to be delivered by a dentist, dental hygienist or dental assistant in the daily practice setting. Furthermore only controlled studies and systematic reviews were included. Methodological quality and outcomes were independently summarised and checked by two reviewers. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria: 4 addressed strategies aimed at the dental professional and 4 addressed strategies aimed at both professional and patient. Only 4 of the studies were of a good quality. The 8 studies used combinations of implementation strategies, which made it difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of distinct components. Professional education appeared to enhance motivation for smoking cessation activities and advice giving. Organisational interventions (e.g., protocols, involvement of the whole team, referral possibilities) and incorporation of patient-oriented tools also contributed to the delivery of smoking cessation interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted support strategies positively influence dental professionals' knowledge of smoking and smoking cessation, their motivation to give advice and their performance. As only 4 studies were of good methodological quality, it was not possible to draw firm conclusions about specific components. Additional research is needed to unravel which strategies best stimulate the provision of smoking cessation advice and support during daily dental practice.

In-training assessment using direct observation of single-patient encounters: a literature review.

We reviewed the literature on instruments for work-based assessment in single clinical encounters, such as the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX), and examined differences between these instruments in characteristics and feasibility, reliability, validity and educational effect. A PubMed search of the literature published before 8 January 2009 yielded 39 articles dealing with 18 different assessment instruments. One researcher extracted data on the characteristics of the instruments and two researchers extracted data on feasibility, reliability, validity and educational effect. Instruments are predominantly formative. Feasibility is generally deemed good and assessor training occurs sparsely but is considered crucial for successful implementation. Acceptable reliability can be achieved with 10 encounters. The validity of many instruments is not investigated, but the validity of the mini-CEX and the 'clinical evaluation exercise' is supported by strong and significant correlations with other valid assessment instruments. The evidence from the few studies on educational effects is not very convincing. The reports on clinical assessment instruments for single work-based encounters are generally positive, but supporting evidence is sparse. Feasibility of instruments seems to be good and reliability requires a minimum of 10 encounters, but no clear conclusions emerge on other aspects. Studies on assessor and learner training and studies examining effects beyond 'happiness data' are badly needed.

The effect of communication skills training on patient outcomes in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature.

The objective of this review was to determine whether communication training for healthcare professionals (HCP), including nurses and medical doctors, in cancer care improves patient outcomes. Eligible studies with a focus on patient outcomes and a controlled or single group pretest-posttest design were identified according to Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines. Seven studies, encompassing 10 papers and involving five randomised controlled trials, were included. Studies involved 411 HCP, including a total of 1677 encounters with adult cancer patients. Forty-nine papers were excluded, primarily because no patient outcomes were reported. Regarding patient satisfaction outcomes, estimated effects in favour of communication training ranged from 0.07 (95% CI: -0.30 to 0.44) for satisfaction with information and support to 0.70 (95% CI: 0.16 to 1.24) for satisfaction with assessment of concerns. No evidence was found for the effectiveness of communication training on patient distress outcomes. We concluded that the current review reveals inconclusive evidence to prove the effectiveness of communication training on patient satisfaction and patient distress. More high-quality studies are needed.

Three methods of multi-source feedback compared: a plea for narrative comments and coworkers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Doctor performance assessments based on multi-source feedback (MSF) are increasingly central in professional self-regulation. Research has shown that simple MSF is often unproductive. It has been suggested that MSF should be delivered by a facilitator and combined with a portfolio. AIMS: To compare three methods of MSF for consultants in the Netherlands and evaluate the feasibility, topics addressed and perceived impact upon clinical practice. METHOD: In 2007, 38 facilitators and 109 consultants participated in the study. The performance assessment system was composed of (i) one of the three MSF methods, namely, Violato's Physician Achievement Review (PAR), the method developed by Ramsey et al. for the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), or the Dutch Appraisal and Assessment Instrument (AAI), (ii) portfolio, (iii) assessment interview with a facilitator and (iv) personal development plan. The evaluation consisted of a postal survey for facilitators and consultants. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association between MSF method used and perceived impact. RESULTS: It takes on average 8 hours to conduct one assessment. The CanMEDS roles 'collaborator', 'communicator' and 'manager' were discussed in, respectively, 79, 74 and 71% of the assessment interviews. The 'health advocate role' was the subject of conversation in 35% of the interviews. Consultants are more satisfied with feedback that contains narrative comments. The perceived impact of MSF that includes coworkers' perspectives significantly exceeds the perceived impact of methods not including this perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Performance assessments based on MSF combined with a portfolio and a facilitator-led interview seem to be feasible in hospital settings. The perceived impact of MSF increases when it contains coworkers' perspectives.

Development of quality indicators for monitoring of the disease course in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To suppress rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients' disease activity, it should be periodically measured and patients should be treated on the basis of the disease activity outcomes. Insight into the actual care, by using quality indicators, is the first step in achieving optimal care. The objective of this study was to develop a set of quality indicators to evaluate RA disease course monitoring of rheumatologists in daily clinical practice. METHODS: A RAND-modified Delphi method in a five-step procedure was applied: a literature search for quality indicators and recommendations about disease course monitoring; a first questionnaire round; a consensus meeting; a second questionnaire round and drawing up the final set. RESULTS: The systematic procedure resulted in the development of 18 quality indicators: 10 process, five structure and three outcome indicators that describe seven domains of disease course monitoring: schedule follow-up visits; measure disease activity; functional impairment; structural damage; change medication; preconditions for measuring disease activity and outcome measures in terms of disease activity. CONCLUSIONS: This quality indicator set can be used to assess the quality of disease course monitoring of rheumatologists in daily clinical practice, and to determine for which aspects of disease course monitoring rheumatologists perform well, or where there is room for improvement. This information can be used to improve the quality of disease course monitoring.

Information provision in fertility care: a call for improvement.

BACKGROUND: Adequate information provision is a crucial dimension of high-quality fertility care. Clinical practice guidelines containing consensus-based recommendations may standardize practice between settings. This study was designed for three purposes: (i) to assess actual adherence to recommendations on information provision, (ii) to measure patient satisfaction with current practice and (iii) to analyse how variation in adherence relates to the characteristics of patients and clinics. METHODS: All recommendations concerning patient information were extracted from 10 national fertility guidelines and edited into a patient questionnaire. Additional questions concerning patient satisfaction and potential determinants of information provision at patient level were included. A total of 2698 couples from 16 clinics were invited to participate. A professional's questionnaire was sent to all gynaecologists to gather potential determinants at clinic level. Multilevel regression analysis was performed to identify the determinants of information provision. RESULTS: A total of 1499 couples (56%) participated. The percentage of couples who reported to have received complete information varied between recommendations from 10 to 96% (mean 57%). Overall, 94% of couples were satisfied with fertility services. The use of checklists for information provision, the presence of obstetrics/gynaecology residents and specialized nursing personnel, and higher patient anxiety scores were significantly associated (P < 0.05) with higher levels of information received. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the possibility of recall bias in questionnaire studies and observed high patient satisfaction with fertility services, we conclude that information provision for infertile couples is currently poor and in need of improvement. This could easily be procured by, for example, the use of information checklists.

Perceived barriers to elective single embryo transfer among IVF professionals: a national survey.

BACKGROUND: After initial years of improvement, the multiple pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization (IVF) in Europe now remains stable at 23% with single embryo transfer (SET) constituting 19% of all IVF cycles. Although elective SET prevents multiple pregnancies after IVF, couples and professionals apparently often decide to transfer more embryos. Previous qualitative research has identified factors that impede the use of elective SET. The aim of this study was to quantify those barriers among IVF professionals and to identify predictors of professionals' willingness to perform elective SET. METHODS: A national survey among all Dutch IVF professionals quantified the barriers suggested by a previous qualitative study and assessed characteristics of the professionals and clinics. Multivariate analysis identified predictors related to the willingness of IVF professionals to perform elective SET. RESULTS: In total, 107 professionals participated. The most frequently mentioned barriers to elective SET use were suboptimal success rates associated with cryopreservation (96%), not seeing twin pregnancies as a complication (79%) and lack of a SET protocol (78%). Two variables seem to predict the professionals' willingness to perform elective SET: university hospital of the initial fertility training (P< 0.01) and high scores of perceived barriers, e.g. professionals' attitudes and skills (P < 0.01). The explained variance of these two variables was 25%. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified the main barriers to elective SET use and predictors for willingness of professionals to perform elective SET. This insight into the decision-making process could be critical in terms of increasing the use of elective SET.

Why don't we perform elective single embryo transfer? A qualitative study among IVF patients and professionals.

BACKGROUND: Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) enables the prevention of multiple pregnancies after in vitro fertilization (IVF). However, in Europe, the multiple pregnancy rate after IVF remains stable at approximately 23%, with SET occurring in 15% of all IVF cycles. In most European clinics, the decision for the number of embryos transferred is established through a form of shared decision-making between patients and professionals. The aim of this study is to explore factors influencing this decision, in particular factors preventing eSET use. METHODS: We performed explorative, semi-structured, in-depth interviews, based on two theoretical models. The interviews were performed among 19 Dutch IVF professionals and 20 patients who had just undergone IVF or were on the waiting list for IVF. The interviews were fully transcribed and two researchers independently scored the factors according to the models. RESULTS: We identified a wide variety of factors, potentially influencing eSET use: 37 with the professionals and 26 among the patients. Examples of factors mentioned by both patients and professionals were: uncertainty about the eSET technique, couples' lack of knowledge about essential eSET aspects, absence of a reimbursement system which favours eSET, inadequate options to select couples suitable for eSET and inferior cryopreservation success rates. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that both IVF professionals and patients identify numerous factors preventing eSET use in clinical practice. To estimate the impact of these factors identified, a quantitative confirmation and assessment of the magnitude of the effect is necessary.

Variation in subfertility care measured by guideline-based performance indicators.

BACKGROUND: About 30-40% of patients do not receive care based on available scientific evidence. For subfertility, this may imply unnecessary and expensive diagnostic tests and treatments. It is therefore important to identify gaps in performance by monitoring current subfertility care. A set of 39 guideline-based performance indicators was previously developed for this purpose. This study aimed to assess several quality criteria of the indicator-set and to use the set to assess current subfertility care. METHODS: A historic cohort study was performed in 16 Dutch subfertility clinics; 2698 couples were invited to participate. Indicator data were gathered by medical record extraction, and patient and professional questionnaires. Quality criteria for each indicator (measurability, reliability, applicability, improvement potential, discriminatory capacity, complexity and case-mix stability) were assessed. Current practice was measured as adherence to the separate indicators. RESULTS: One thousand four-hundred and ninety-nine (56%) couples participated. All indicators were measurable, but the results for the other quality criteria varied. In total, 14 of the 39 indicators scored <50% adherence. Variation in performance between the clinics was up to 100%. The highest median adherence (86%) is found within the guideline 'indications for IVF-treatment'. The lowest median adherence is found within the guideline 'initial assessment of fertility' (43%), followed closely by the guideline 'anovulation' (44%). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the quality of the developed indicator-set for monitoring clinical subfertility care. A first assessment in the Netherlands reveals large variation between clinics and ample room for improvement of care.

The methodological quality of clinical guidelines of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE).

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines bridge the gap between the evidence from literature and clinical practice, and they may provide guidance in ethical, legal and societal dilemmas. To explore the potentials for future international guideline development within the field of human reproduction and embryology, we assessed the quality of existing guidelines produced by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). METHODS: We systematically searched for the ESHRE guidelines produced after 1996 in electronic databases and on the Internet. Subsequently, we assessed the methodological quality of these guidelines using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument. RESULTS: The overall methodological quality of most of the 11 selected ESHRE guidelines was poor. Most of the guidelines scored <30% in the domains of 'stakeholder involvement', 'rigour of development', 'applicability' and 'editorial independence'. Only one guideline was rated 'strongly recommended'. CONCLUSIONS: The methodological quality of the guidelines produced under the auspices of ESHRE can be improved. We suggest a systematic, up-to-date methodology, investment in guideline development specialists, systematic quality control and the incorporation of indicator development. Furthermore, attention should be paid to the document nomenclature, and an ESHRE guidelines' summary on a special part of the ESHRE website would be a good initiative.

Individual patient education for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: While many different types of patient education are widely used, the effect of individual patient education for low-back pain (LBP) has not yet been systematically reviewed. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether individual patient education is effective in the treatment of non-specific low-back pain and which type is most effective. SEARCH STRATEGY: A computerized literature search of MEDLINE (1966 to July 2006), EMBASE (1988 to July 2006), CINAHL (1982 to July 2006), PsycINFO (1984 to July 2006), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2) was performed. References cited in the identified articles were screened. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected if the design was a randomised controlled trial; if patients experienced LBP; if the type of intervention concerned individual patient education, and if the publication was written in English, German, or Dutch. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality was independently assessed by two review authors. Articles that met at least 50% of the quality criteria were considered high quality. Main outcome measures were pain intensity, global measure of improvement, back pain-specific functional status, return-to-work, and generic functional status. Analysis comprised a qualitative analysis. Evidence was classified as strong, moderate, limited, conflicting or no evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 24 studies included in this review, 14 (58%) were of high quality. Individual patient education was compared with no intervention in 12 studies; with non-educational interventions in 11 studies; and with other individual educational interventions in eight studies. Results showed that for patients with subacute LBP, there is strong evidence that an individual 2.5 hour oral educational session is more effective on short-term and long-term return-to-work than no intervention. Educational interventions that were less intensive were not more effective than no intervention. Furthermore, there is strong evidence that individual education for patients with (sub)acute LBP is as effective as non-educational interventions on long-term pain and global improvement and that for chronic patients, individual education is less effective for back pain-specific function when compared to more intensive interventions. Comparison of different types of individual education did not show significant differences. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For patients with acute or subacute LBP, intensive patient education seems to be effective. For patients with chronic LBP, the effectiveness of individual education is still unclear.

Determinants of the choice for single or double embryo transfer in twin prone couples.

BACKGROUND: Some 84% of all European in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles is performed with the transfer of more than 1 embryo, with 22% resulting in twin pregnancies. At many centres, the choice for one or more embryos is made through a shared decision-making process. To reduce the twin rate in a twin prone population by increasing the use of elective single embryo transfer (eSET), it is important to identify which objective patient factors are related to the choice for double embryo transfer (DET) and eSET. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify determinants related to the choice for the transfer of eSET or DET in a twin prone population. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 477 twin prone couples at 2 Dutch IVF centres. We collected data on possible objective patient determinants, and a multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of these determinants on the decision for DET. RESULTS: Of the twin prone couples, 61% opted for DET in their first IVF/ICSI cycle. Within the multivariate analysis, two objective patient determinants acted as a risk factor for the choice of DET - a lower number of available embryos (p=0.03) and a previous ongoing pregnancy after IVF/ICSI (p=0.04). The explained variance of the determinants was 3%. CONCLUSIONS: In twin prone couples, 61% still opted for DET in their first IVF/ICSI cycle. We identified 2 objective patient determinants for DET, but with an explained variance of only 3%. Therefore, further research is necessary to identify barriers and facilitators for eSET at both the level of the couples and clinicians.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in general practice: mismatch between cardiovascular risk and patients' risk perceptions.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) emphasize identifying high-risk patients for more intensive management, but patients' misconceptions of risk hamper implementation. Insight is needed into the type of patients that general practitioners (GPs) encounter in their cardiovascular prevention activities. How appropriate are the risk perceptions and worries of patients with whom GPs discuss CVD risks? What determines inappropriate risk perception? METHOD: Cross-sectional study in 34 general practices. The study included patients aged 40 to 70 years with whom CVD risk was discussed during consultation. After the consultation, the GPs completed a registration form, and patients completed a questionnaire. Correlations between patients' actual CVD risk and risk perceptions were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 490 patients were included. In 17% of the consultations, patients were actually at high risk. Risk was perceived inappropriately by nearly 4 in 5 high-risk patients (incorrect optimism) and by 1 in 5 low-risk patients (incorrect pessimism). Smoking, hypertension, and obesity were determinants of perceiving CVD risk as high, whereas surprisingly, diabetic patients did not report any anxiety about their CVD risk. Men were more likely to perceive their CVD risk inappropriately than women. CONCLUSION: In communicating CVD risk, GPs must be aware that they mostly encounter low-risk patients and that the perceived risk and worry do not necessarily correspond with the actual risk. Incorrect perceptions of CVD risk among men and patients with diabetes were striking.

Interventions for improving older patients' involvement in primary care episodes.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing expectation among patients that they should be involved in the delivery of medical care. Accumulating evidence from empirical studies shows that patients of average age who are encouraged to participate more actively in treatment decisions have more favourable health outcomes, in terms of both physiological and functional status, than those who do not. Interventions to encourage more active participation may be focused on different stages, including: the use of health care; preparation for contact with a care provider; contact with the care provider; or feedback about care. However, it is unclear whether the benefits of these interventions apply to the elderly as well. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions in primary medical care that improve the involvement of older patients (>=65 years) in their health care. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group Specialised Register (May 2003); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2004; MEDLINE (Ovid) (1966 to June 2004); EMBASE (1988 to June 2004); PsycINFO (1872 to June 2004); DARE, The Cochrane Library issue 1, 2004; ERIC (1966 to June 2004); CINAHL (1982 to June 2004); Sociological Abstracts (1963 to June 2004); Dissertation Abstracts International (1861 to June 2004); and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials of interventions to improve the involvement of older patients (>= 65 years) in single consultations or episodes of primary medical care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Results are presented narratively as meta-analysis was not possible. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three studies involving 433 patients. Overall, the quality of studies was not high, and there was moderate to high risk of bias. Interventions of a pre-visit booklet and a pre-visit session (either combined or pre-visit session alone) led to more questioning behaviour and more self-reported active behaviour in the intervention group (3 studies). One study (booklet and pre-visit session) showed no difference in consultation length and time engaged in talk between the intervention and control groups. The booklet and pre-visit session in one study was associated with more satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of care for the intervention group although no difference in overall satisfaction between intervention and control. There was no long-term follow up to see if effects were sustained. No studies measured outcomes relating to the use of health care, health status and wellbeing, or health behaviour. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall this review shows some positive effects of specific methods to improve the involvement of older people in primary care episodes. Because the evidence is limited, however, we can not recommend the use of the reviewed interventions in daily practice. There should be a balance between respecting patients' autonomy and stimulating their active participation in health care. Face-to-face coaching sessions, whether or not complemented with written materials, may be the way forward. As this is impractical for the whole population, it could be worthwhile to identify a subgroup of older patients who might benefit the most from enhanced involvement, ie. those who want to be involved, but lack the necessary skills. This group could be coached either individually or, more practically, in group sessions.

WITHDRAWN: Interventions to implement prevention in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians hold a strategic position in delivering preventive services. However discrepancies exist between evidence based guidelines and practice. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register (November 1995; August 1999), MEDLINE (1980 to 1995) and hand searched relevant journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses of interventions to improve preventive services by primary care professionals responsible for patient care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were included, involving more than 2000 health professionals and 99,000 people, with 83 comparisons between intervention and control groups. Post intervention differences between intervention and control groups varied widely within and across categories of interventions. Most interventions were found to be effective in some studies, but not in others. Five comparisons of group education versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -4% and +31%. Nine comparisons of physician reminders versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between 5% and 24%. Fourteen comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -3% and +64%. Six comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus group education reported absolute changes varying between -31% and +28%. All these comparisons used randomised groups. Ten comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention used non-randomised groups and showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -5% and +21%. The remaining planned comparisons within categories of interventions contained less than five comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no solid basis for assuming that a particular intervention or package of interventions will work. Effective interventions to increase preventive activities in primary care exist, but there is considerable variation in the level of change achieved, with effect sizes usually small or moderate. Tailoring interventions to address specific barriers to change in a particular setting is probably important. Multifaceted interventions may be more effective than single interventions, because more barriers to change can be addressed. Future research should analyse barriers to change and interventions to implement preventive services in more detail, to clarify how interventions relate to specific barriers. Since more complex interventions are likely to be more effective but also more costly, economic evaluations should also be included.

Clinical indicators: development and applications.

Clinical indicators give an indication of the quality of the patient care delivered. They must comply with highquality standards and should be constructed in a careful and transparent manner. Indicators must be relevant to the important aspects of quality of care. There should be adequate research evidence that the recommendations from which they are derived are related to clinical effectiveness, safety and efficiency. They should measure the quality in a valid and reliable manner with little inter- and intra-observer variability so that they are suitable for comparisons between professionals, practices, and institutions. Indicators are selected from research data with consideration for optimal patient care (preferably an evidence-based guideline), supplemented by expert opinion. In the selection procedure, the feasibility, such as their measurability and improvability, is important beside validity and reliability. A clinical indicator should be defined exactly and expressed as a quotient. After a try-out, the measurements and reporting should follow. The report contains an in-depth analysis of causal and contributing factors associated with the measured results. A description of the clinical circumstances and a correction for case mix should be included to allow for a justified interpretation. The indicators must be part of an improvement strategy, for which comparison feedback is often used. We give examples of indicator development and applications in oncology, diabetes care, and the use of antibiotics for treating pneumonia. We explain how comparison with reference data can be used to construct improvement programmes.