Literature DB >> 27471223

Multi-faceted implementation strategy to increase use of a clinical guideline for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis in primary care.

Anna E C Kingma1, Henk F van Stel1, Ruud Oudega1, Karel G M Moons1, Geert-Jan Geersing1.   

Abstract

Background: A clinical decision rule (CDR), combined with a negative D-dimer test, can safely rule out deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in primary care. This strategy is recommended by guidelines, yet uptake by GPs is low. Objective: To evaluate a multi-faceted implementation strategy aimed at increased use of the guideline recommended CDR plus D-dimer test in primary care patients with suspected DVT.
Methods: This multi-faceted implementation strategy consisted of educational outreach visits, financial reimbursements and periodical newsletters. 217 Dutch GPs (implementation group) received this strategy and included patients. Effectiveness was measured through the following patient-level outcomes: (i) proportion of non-referred patients, (ii) proportion of missed DVT cases within this group and (iii) the proportion of patients in whom the guideline was applied incorrectly. Implementation outcomes ('acceptability', 'feasibility', 'fidelity' and 'sustainability') were assessed with an online questionnaire. Patient-level outcomes were compared with those of patients included by 450 GPs, uninformed about the study's purposes providing information about usual care.
Results: 336 (54%) of 619 analyzable implementation group patients were not referred, missing 6 [1.8% (95% confidence interval 0.7% to 3.9%)] DVT cases. Incorrect guideline use was observed in 199 patients (32%). Self-reported acceptability, feasibility and expected sustainability were high. Guideline use increased from 42% to an expected continuation of use of 91%. Only 32 usual care GPs included 62 patients, making formal comparison unreliable. Conclusions: This multi-faceted implementation strategy safely reduced patient referral to secondary care, despite frequently incorrect application of the guideline and resulted in high acceptability, feasibility and expected sustainability.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  General practitioners; health plan implementation; primary care physician; primary health care; referral and consultation; venous thrombosis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27471223     DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmw066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Pract        ISSN: 0263-2136            Impact factor:   2.267


  4 in total

1.  Secondary analysis of frequency, circumstances and consequences of calculation errors of the HEART (history, ECG, age, risk factors and troponin) score at the emergency departments of nine hospitals in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Marten Ras; Johannes B Reitsma; Arno W Hoes; Alfred Jacob Six; Judith M Poldervaart
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-22       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Real-life impact of clinical prediction rules for venous thromboembolism in primary care: a cross-sectional cohort study.

Authors:  Rosanne van Maanen; Annelieke E C Kingma; Ruud Oudega; Frans H Rutten; Karel Moons; Geert-Jan Geersing
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 3.  Point-of-Care Testing for D-Dimer in the Diagnosis of Venous Thromboembolism in Primary Care: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Christopher P Price; Matthew Fay; Rogier M Hopstaken
Journal:  Cardiol Ther       Date:  2020-12-02

4.  GPs' views on the implementation of combined lifestyle interventions in primary care in the Netherlands: a qualitative study.

Authors:  W van der Heiden; Jpw Lacroix; E P Moll van Charante; Ejaj Beune
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 2.692

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.