Literature DB >> 11761203

Adherence to guidelines on cervical cancer screening in general practice: programme elements of successful implementation.

R P Hermens1, E Hak, M E Hulscher, J C Braspenning, R P Grol.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is still only limited understanding of whether and why interventions to facilitate the implementation of guidelines for improving primary care are successful. It is therefore important to look inside the 'black box' of the intervention, to ascertain which elements work well or less well. AIM: To assess the associations of key elements of a nationwide multifaceted prevention programme with the successful implementation of cervical screening guidelines in general practice. DESIGN OF STUDY: A nationwide prospective cohort study.
SETTING: A random sample of one-third of all 4,758 general practices in The Netherlands (n = 1,586).
METHOD: General practitioners (GPs) in The Netherlands were exposed to a two-and-a-half-year nationwide multifaceted prevention programme to improve the adherence to national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. Adherence to guidelines at baseline and after the intervention and actual exposure to programme elements were assessed in the sample using self-administered questionnaires.
RESULTS: Both baseline and post-measurement questionnaires were returned by 988 practices (response rate = 62%). No major differences in baseline practice characteristics between study population, non-responders, and all Netherlands practices were observed. After the intervention all practices improved markedly (P<0.001) in their incorporation of nine out of 10 guideline indicators for effective cervical screening into practice. The most important elements for successful implementation were: specific software modules (odds ratios and 95% confidence intervalsfor all nine indicators ranged from OR = 1.85 [95% CI = 1.24-2.77] to OR = 10.2 [95% CI = 7.58-14.1]); two or more 'practice visits' by outreach visitors (ORs and 95% CIs for six indicators ranged from OR = 1.46 [95% CI= 1.01-2.12] to OR = 2.35 [95% CI = 1.63-3.38]); and an educational programme for practice assistants (ORs and 95% CIs for four indicators ranged from OR = 1.57 [95% CI = 1.00-1.92] to OR = 1.90 [95% CI = 1.25-2.88]).
CONCLUSION: A multifaceted programme targeting GPs, including facilitating software modules, outreach visits, and educational sessions for PAs, contributes to the successful implementation of national guidelines for cervical screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11761203      PMCID: PMC1314146     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  18 in total

Review 1.  Interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care.

Authors:  M E Hulscher; M Wensing; R P Grol; T van der Weijden; C van Weel
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Implementing guidelines in general practice care.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1992-09

Review 3.  Cancer prevention in primary care. Screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  J Austoker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-07-23

Review 4.  Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective?

Authors:  M Wensing; T van der Weijden; R Grol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group.

Authors:  L A Bero; R Grilli; J M Grimshaw; E Harvey; A D Oxman; M A Thomson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-08-15

6.  Attendance to cervical cancer screening in family practices in The Netherlands.

Authors:  R P Hermens; M A Tacken; M E Hulscher; J C Braspenning; R P Grol
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Improving population-based cervical cancer screening in general practice: effects of a national strategy.

Authors:  R P Hermens; E Hak; M E Hulscher; J Mulder; M A Tacken; J C Braspenning; R P Grol
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.038

8.  Promoting prevention in primary care: controlled trial of low technology, low cost approach.

Authors:  E Fullard; G Fowler; M Gray
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1987-04-25

9.  Do general practices adhere to organizational guidelines for effective cervical cancer screening?

Authors:  R P Hermens; E Hak; M E Hulscher; J Mulder; J C Braspenning; R P Grol
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.267

10.  Improving influenza vaccination coverage among high-risk patients: a role for computer-supported prevention strategy?

Authors:  E Hak; G A van Essen; W A Stalman; R A de Melker
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.267

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Practice guidelines and measurement: state-of-the-science.

Authors:  Patricia C Dykes
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.250

2.  Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions.

Authors:  M E J L Hulscher; M G H Laurant; R P T M Grol
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-02

Review 3.  Facilitators and barriers to implementing quality measurement in primary mental health care: Systematic review.

Authors:  Donald Addington; Tania Kyle; Soni Desai; JianLi Wang
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  The role of information technology in translating educational interventions into practice: an analysis using the PRECEDE/PROCEED model.

Authors:  Charlene Weir; Nanci McLeskey; Cherie Brunker; Denise Brooks; Mark A Supiano
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  Implementing clinical guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: barriers and solutions.

Authors:  Jeff D Overington; Yao C Huang; Michael J Abramson; Juliet L Brown; John R Goddard; Rayleen V Bowman; Kwun M Fong; Ian A Yang
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  A randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers.

Authors:  Richard G Roetzheim; Lisa K Christman; Paul B Jacobsen; Alan B Cantor; Jennifer Schroeder; Rania Abdulla; Seft Hunter; Thomas N Chirikos; Jeffrey P Krischer
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Quality assurance through quality improvement and professional development in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

Authors:  Elvira J Siegl; Jacqueline W Miller; Kris Khan; Susan E Harris
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 8.  The role of implementation science in improving epilepsy surgery utilization.

Authors:  Debopam Samanta
Journal:  Epilepsy Behav       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 3.337

9.  Implementing telephone triage in general practice: a process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jamie Murdoch; Anna Varley; Emily Fletcher; Nicky Britten; Linnie Price; Raff Calitri; Colin Green; Valerie Lattimer; Suzanne H Richards; David A Richards; Chris Salisbury; Rod S Taylor; John L Campbell
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 2.497

10.  A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity.

Authors:  Christopher Carroll; Malcolm Patterson; Stephen Wood; Andrew Booth; Jo Rick; Shashi Balain
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2007-11-30       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.