OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of tailored interventions to implement guidelines for urinary tract infections in women and sore throat. DESIGN: Unblinded, cluster randomised pretest-post-test trial. SETTING: 142 general practices in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: 72 practices received interventions to implement guidelines for urinary tract infection and 70 practices received interventions to implement guidelines for sore throat, serving as controls for each other. 59 practices in the urinary tract infection group and 61 practices in the sore throat group completed the study. Outcomes were measured in 16 939 consultations for sore throat and 9887 consultations for urinary tract infection. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions were developed to overcome identified barriers to implementing the guidelines. The main components of the tailored interventions were patient educational material, computer based decision support and reminders, an increase in the fee for telephone consultations, and interactive courses for general practitioners and practice assistants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in rates of use of antibiotics, laboratory tests, and telephone consultations. RESULTS: Patients in the sore throat group were 3% less likely to receive antibiotics after the intervention. Women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in the intervention group were 5.1% less likely to have a laboratory test ordered. No significant differences were found between the groups for the other outcomes. Large variation was found across the included practices in the rates of antibiotic prescription, use of laboratory tests and telephone consultations, and in the extent of change for all three outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Passively delivered, complex interventions targeted at identified barriers to change had little effect in changing practice.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of tailored interventions to implement guidelines for urinary tract infections in women and sore throat. DESIGN: Unblinded, cluster randomised pretest-post-test trial. SETTING: 142 general practices in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: 72 practices received interventions to implement guidelines for urinary tract infection and 70 practices received interventions to implement guidelines for sore throat, serving as controls for each other. 59 practices in the urinary tract infection group and 61 practices in the sore throat group completed the study. Outcomes were measured in 16 939 consultations for sore throat and 9887 consultations for urinary tract infection. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions were developed to overcome identified barriers to implementing the guidelines. The main components of the tailored interventions were patient educational material, computer based decision support and reminders, an increase in the fee for telephone consultations, and interactive courses for general practitioners and practice assistants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in rates of use of antibiotics, laboratory tests, and telephone consultations. RESULTS:Patients in the sore throat group were 3% less likely to receive antibiotics after the intervention. Women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in the intervention group were 5.1% less likely to have a laboratory test ordered. No significant differences were found between the groups for the other outcomes. Large variation was found across the included practices in the rates of antibiotic prescription, use of laboratory tests and telephone consultations, and in the extent of change for all three outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Passively delivered, complex interventions targeted at identified barriers to change had little effect in changing practice.
Authors: J M Grimshaw; L Shirran; R Thomas; G Mowatt; C Fraser; L Bero; R Grilli; E Harvey; A Oxman; M A O'Brien Journal: Med Care Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Mark Loeb; Kevin Brazil; Lynne Lohfeld; Allison McGeer; Andrew Simor; Kurt Stevenson; Dick Zoutman; Stephanie Smith; Xiwu Liu; Stephen D Walter Journal: BMJ Date: 2005-09-08
Authors: Rachel A Laws; Bibiana C Chan; Anna M Williams; Gawaine Powell Davies; Upali W Jayasinghe; Mahnaz Fanaian; Mark F Harris Journal: BMC Nurs Date: 2010-02-23
Authors: Cheryl L L Carling; Doris Tove Kristoffersen; Signe Flottorp; Atle Fretheim; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Elie A Akl; Jeph Herrin; Thomas D MacKenzie; Victor M Montori Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2009-08-25 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Sallie-Anne Pearson; Annette Moxey; Jane Robertson; Isla Hains; Margaret Williamson; James Reeve; David Newby Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2009-08-28 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Horst C Vollmar; Herbert Mayer; Thomas Ostermann; Martin E Butzlaff; John E Sandars; Stefan Wilm; Monika A Rieger Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2010-01-04 Impact factor: 7.327