OBJECTIVE: The project aimed to search for online evidence in a structured way in consultation with the patient, to investigate whether the evidence discovered changed decisions. METHODS: We developed the "Online on-the-spot" method (OOS) as a part of a quality improvement program. Within a general practice consultation three physicians and two trainees searched in a fixed pattern and sequence the national guidelines of general practitioners developed by the Dutch College of General Practitioners, Clinical Evidence, Trip-database and the British Medical Journal. All GPs who performed this quality improvement program were in favor of the project. RESULTS: During 3 months five GPs registered 365 searches out of 2920 patient-doctor contacts. For each eight patient-doctor contacts there was one online search. Patients were actively involved in 53% of the searches (95%C.I.: 48-57%). On average, two databases were consulted. An answer to the question was found in 87% of cases and in almost half of cases it was relevant new information for the doctor. The GP changed his decision due to the problem in 26% (95%C.I.: 21-29) of cases. At the end of the OOS project, the number of searches within 5 min were significantly higher than at the start: 51% (95% C.I.: 44-59) to 33% (95% C.I.: 24-43), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The OOS project is a timely answer to the doctors' educational needs in attending to the patient. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: OOS could connect the patient, the doctor and the evidence.
OBJECTIVE: The project aimed to search for online evidence in a structured way in consultation with the patient, to investigate whether the evidence discovered changed decisions. METHODS: We developed the "Online on-the-spot" method (OOS) as a part of a quality improvement program. Within a general practice consultation three physicians and two trainees searched in a fixed pattern and sequence the national guidelines of general practitioners developed by the Dutch College of General Practitioners, Clinical Evidence, Trip-database and the British Medical Journal. All GPs who performed this quality improvement program were in favor of the project. RESULTS: During 3 months five GPs registered 365 searches out of 2920 patient-doctor contacts. For each eight patient-doctor contacts there was one online search. Patients were actively involved in 53% of the searches (95%C.I.: 48-57%). On average, two databases were consulted. An answer to the question was found in 87% of cases and in almost half of cases it was relevant new information for the doctor. The GP changed his decision due to the problem in 26% (95%C.I.: 21-29) of cases. At the end of the OOS project, the number of searches within 5 min were significantly higher than at the start: 51% (95% C.I.: 44-59) to 33% (95% C.I.: 24-43), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The OOS project is a timely answer to the doctors' educational needs in attending to the patient. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: OOS could connect the patient, the doctor and the evidence.
Authors: Patricia Alafaireet; Jeff Belden; Matt Botkin; Karl Kochendorfer; Robin Kruse; Dylan Strecker; Jayne Williams Journal: Mo Med Date: 2017 Jul-Aug
Authors: Nicolas Delvaux; Stijn Van de Velde; Bert Aertgeerts; Martine Goossens; Benjamin Fauquert; Ilka Kunnamo; Paul Van Royen Journal: J Eval Clin Pract Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Lauren A Maggio; Christopher A Aakre; Guilherme Del Fiol; Jane Shellum; David A Cook Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Arjen Hoogendam; Anton F H Stalenhoef; Pieter F de Vries Robbé; A John P M Overbeke Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2008-10-03 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: M F Kortekaas; M E L Bartelink; N P A Zuithoff; G J M G van der Heijden; N J de Wit; A W Hoes Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 2.692