PURPOSE: We undertook a study to assess the impact of comparative feedback vs general reminders on practice-based referrals to a tobacco cessation quit line and estimated costs for projected quit responses. METHODS: We conducted a group-randomized clinical trial comparing the impact of 6 quarterly (18 months) feedback reports (intervention) with that of general reminders (control) on practice-based clinician referrals to a quit-line service. Feedback reports were based on an Achievable Benchmark of Care approach using baseline practice, clinician, and patient survey responses, and referrals per quarter. Comparable quit responses and costs were estimated. RESULTS:Three hundred eight clinicians participated (171 family medicine, 88 internal medicine, 49 obstetrics-gynecology) from 87 primary care practices in Michigan. After 18 months, there were more referrals from the intervention than from the control practices (484 vs 220; P <.001). Practice facsimile (fax) referrals (84%, n = 595) exceeded telephone referrals (16%, n = 109), but telephone referrals resulted in greater likelihood of enrollment (77% telephone vs 44% fax, P <.001). The estimated number of smokers who quit based on the level of services utilized by referred smokers was 66 in the feedback and 36 in the gentle reminder practices. CONCLUSION: Providing comparative feedback on clinician referrals to a quit-line service had a modest impact with limited increased costs.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We undertook a study to assess the impact of comparative feedback vs general reminders on practice-based referrals to a tobacco cessation quit line and estimated costs for projected quit responses. METHODS: We conducted a group-randomized clinical trial comparing the impact of 6 quarterly (18 months) feedback reports (intervention) with that of general reminders (control) on practice-based clinician referrals to a quit-line service. Feedback reports were based on an Achievable Benchmark of Care approach using baseline practice, clinician, and patient survey responses, and referrals per quarter. Comparable quit responses and costs were estimated. RESULTS: Three hundred eight clinicians participated (171 family medicine, 88 internal medicine, 49 obstetrics-gynecology) from 87 primary care practices in Michigan. After 18 months, there were more referrals from the intervention than from the control practices (484 vs 220; P <.001). Practice facsimile (fax) referrals (84%, n = 595) exceeded telephone referrals (16%, n = 109), but telephone referrals resulted in greater likelihood of enrollment (77% telephone vs 44% fax, P <.001). The estimated number of smokers who quit based on the level of services utilized by referred smokers was 66 in the feedback and 36 in the gentle reminder practices. CONCLUSION: Providing comparative feedback on clinician referrals to a quit-line service had a modest impact with limited increased costs.
Authors: J K Ockene; J Kristeller; R Goldberg; T L Amick; P S Pekow; D Hosmer; M Quirk; K Kalan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 1991 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Rajani S Sadasivam; Timothy P Hogan; Julie E Volkman; Bridget M Smith; Heather L Coley; Jessica H Williams; Kathryn Delaughter; Midge N Ray; Gregg H Gilbert; Daniel E Ford; Jeroan J Allison; Thomas K Houston Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: José S Marcano Belisario; Michelle N Bruggeling; Laura H Gunn; Serena Brusamento; Josip Car Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-12-12
Authors: Kimber P Richter; Babalola Faseru; Theresa I Shireman; Laura M Mussulman; Niaman Nazir; Terry Bush; Taneisha S Scheuermann; Kristopher J Preacher; Beatriz H Carlini; Brooke Magnusson; Edward F Ellerbeck; Carol Cramer; David J Cook; Mary J Martell Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Michael Fiore; Rob Adsit; Mark Zehner; Danielle McCarthy; Susan Lundsten; Paul Hartlaub; Todd Mahr; Allison Gorrilla; Amy Skora; Timothy Baker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Midge N Ray; Ellen Funkhouser; Jessica H Williams; Rajani S Sadasivam; Gregg H Gilbert; Heather L Coley; D Brad Rindal; Thomas K Houston Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Robin L Corelli; Alan J Zillich; Carl de Moor; Margherita R Giuliano; Jennifer Arnold; Christine M Fenlon; Cami L Douglas; Brooke Magnusson; Susan M Zbikowski; Alexander V Prokhorov; Karen Suchanek Hudmon Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2012-07-27
Authors: Jeffrey A Linder; Nancy A Rigotti; Louise I Schneider; Jennifer H K Kelley; Phyllis Brawarsky; Jennifer S Haas Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-04-27
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Manfred Stommel; William D Corser; Adesuwa Olomu; Jodi Summers Holtrop; Azfar Siddiqi; Susan L Dunn Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-07-10 Impact factor: 5.128