Effectiveness and cost of different strategies for information feedback in general practice.

Health Services Research Unit, University of Warwick.
British Journal of General Practice (Impact Factor: 2.36). 02/1994; 44(378):19-24.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness and relative cost of three forms of information feedback to general practices--graphical, graphical plus a visit by a medical facilitator and tabular.
Routinely collected, centrally-held data were used where possible, analysed at practice level. Some non-routine practice data in the form of risk factor recording in medical notes, for example weight, smoking status, alcohol consumption and blood pressure, were also provided to those who requested it. The 52 participating practices were stratified and randomly allocated to one of the three feedback groups. The cost of providing each type of feedback was determined. The immediate response of practitioners to the form of feedback (acceptability), ease of understanding (intelligibility), and usefulness of regular feedback was recorded. Changes introduced as a result of feedback were assessed by questionnaire shortly after feedback, and 12 months later. Changes at the practice level in selected indicators were also assessed 12 and 24 months after initial feedback.
The resulting cost per effect was calculated to be 46.10 pounds for both graphical and tabular feedback, 132.50 pounds for graphical feedback plus facilitator visit and 773.00 pounds for the manual audit of risk factors recorded in the practice notes. The three forms of feedback did not differ in intelligibility or usefulness, but feedback plus a medical facilitator visit was significantly less acceptable. There was a high level of self-reported organizational change following feedback, with 69% of practices reporting changes as a direct result; this was not significantly different for the three types of feedback. There were no significant changes in the selected indicators at 12 or 24 months following feedback. The practice characteristic most closely related to better indicators of preventive practice was practice size, smaller practices performing significantly better. Separate clinics were not associated with better preventive practice.
It is concluded that feedback strategies using graphical and tabular comparative data are equally cost-effective in general practice with about two thirds of practices reporting organizational change as a consequence; feedback involving unsolicited medical facilitator visits is less cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness of manual risk factor audit is also called into question.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was a systematic review with a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the overall effect size of practice facilitation and possible moderating factors. The primary outcome was the change in evidence-based practice behavior calculated as a standardized mean difference. In this systematic review, we searched 4 electronic databases and the reference lists of published literature reviews to find practice facilitation studies that identified evidence-based guideline implementation within primary care practices as the outcome. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published from 1966 to December 2010 in English language only peer-reviewed journals. Reviews of each study were conducted and assessed for quality; data were abstracted, and standardized mean difference estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Publication bias, influence, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted. Twenty-three studies contributed to the analysis for a total of 1,398 participating practices: 697 practice facilitation intervention and 701 control group practices. The degree of variability between studies was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone (I2 = 20%). An overall effect size of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.68) favored practice facilitation (z = 8.76; P <.001), and publication bias was evident. Primary care practices are 2.76 (95% CI, 2.18-3.43) times more likely to adopt evidence-based guidelines through practice facilitation. Meta-regression analysis indicated that tailoring (P = .05), the intensity of the intervention (P = .03), and the number of intervention practices per facilitator (P = .004) modified evidence-based guideline adoption. Practice facilitation has a moderately robust effect on evidence-based guideline adoption within primary care. Implementation fidelity factors, such as tailoring, the number of practices per facilitator, and the intensity of the intervention, have important resource implications.
    The Annals of Family Medicine 01/2012; 10(1):63-74. · 4.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background : Evidence-based guidelines suggest that all services, wards and clinics within hospitals consider smoking status a vital sign and routinely provide cessation care. Despite this, such opportunities are currently under-utilized. The aim of the present pilot study was to determine the potential effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of computer delivery of smoking cessation advice to surgical preadmission patients. Methods : All smokers attending a non-cardiac surgical preadmission clinic at the John Hunter Hospital, New South Wales, com-pleted a brief computerized smoking cessation intervention programme. Nine months following completion of the programme, patients completed a follow-up telephone interview that assessed their smoking status and the acceptability of the programme. Results : At follow up, 22 of the 37 participants (60.0%) reported that they had stopped smoking prior to their surgery 9 months previously. Of the 37 participants at follow up, five reported that they were no longer smokers at that time, a cessation rate of 13.5%. Among those patients still smoking, a trend toward smoking fewer cigarettes was evident. Of the 56 smokers at baseline, all com-pleted the computerized smoking cessation programme, with an average completion time of 21 min. A large majority of the smokers (80%) and non-smokers (88%) found that the provision of smoking cessation advice by the computer was appropriate and acceptable. Extrapolation of the results to a full year suggests a cost per quitter of $443. Conclusions : An interactive computerized smoking cessation programme is an acceptable and feasible method of routinely encouraging surgical preadmission clinic patients to stop or reduce their smoking. Further development and testing of the efficacy of this approach is required.
    ANZ J. Surg. 01/2002; 72:618-622.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To test the effects of feedback of information about patients' asthma to primary care teams. Patients' reports of morbidity, use of health services, and drug use on questionnaire was given to primary care teams. Randomised controlled trial with general practices as the subject of the intervention was used to test effectiveness of supplying information. Primary care in district health authority, London. 23 general practices, each of which notified at least 20 asthmatic patients aged 15-60 years for each principal. Practices were randomly allocated to an invention group (receiving feedback of information on control of asthma) or a control group (no feedback). Information on cards inserted in patients' medical records; booklet copies of information for team members; formal presentation to primary care teams; poster displays of data on patients in each practice. Type and frequency of asthma symptoms, use of health services, use of asthma drugs. Reported morbidity at entry to the study was substantial: 45% (818) patients reported breathlessness at least once a week. Less than half these patients were using inhaled steroids regularly. Intervention and control groups did not differ in practice or patient characteristics on entry to the study. In spite of the potential for improvement no differences were observed between the two practice groups at the end of the study--for example, breathlessness at least once a week in last six months was experienced by 36% in intervention group v 35% in control group (t = -0.27, P < 0.79); surgery attendance in last six months by 48% v 48% (t = -0.05, P < 0.96); regular use of inhaled steroids by 60% v 58% (t = 0.51, P < 0.62). Feedback to general practitioners of information about patients' asthma does not on its own lead to change in the outcome of clinical care.
    BMJ Clinical Research 10/1995; 311(7012):1065-9. · 14.09 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 10, 2014