BACKGROUND: The "Put Prevention into Practice" (PPIP) program was designed to enhance the capacity of health care providers to deliver clinical preventive services. This study was designed to evaluate the program's effectiveness when applied to family physicians in private practice settings. METHODS: Eight Midwestern practices that had purchased PPIP kits were identified and agreed to participate in the study. A comparative case study approach encompassing a variety of data collection techniques was used. These techniques included participant observation of clinic operations and patient encounters, semistructured and key informant interviews with physicians and staff members, chart reviews, and structured postpatient encounter and office environment checklists. Content analysis of the qualitative data and construction of the individual cases were done by consensus of the research team. RESULTS: PPIP materials are not being used, even by the clinics that ordered them. Physicians already providing quality preventive services prefer their existing materials to those in the PPIP kit. Sites that are underutilizing preventive services are unable or unwilling to independently implement the PPIP program. CONCLUSIONS: Development of technical support may facilitate implementation of PPIP materials into those practices most deficient in providing preventive services. Given the diversity of practice environments it is unlikely that a "one size fits all" approach will ever be able to address the needs of all providers.
BACKGROUND: The "Put Prevention into Practice" (PPIP) program was designed to enhance the capacity of health care providers to deliver clinical preventive services. This study was designed to evaluate the program's effectiveness when applied to family physicians in private practice settings. METHODS: Eight Midwestern practices that had purchased PPIP kits were identified and agreed to participate in the study. A comparative case study approach encompassing a variety of data collection techniques was used. These techniques included participant observation of clinic operations and patient encounters, semistructured and key informant interviews with physicians and staff members, chart reviews, and structured postpatient encounter and office environment checklists. Content analysis of the qualitative data and construction of the individual cases were done by consensus of the research team. RESULTS: PPIP materials are not being used, even by the clinics that ordered them. Physicians already providing quality preventive services prefer their existing materials to those in the PPIP kit. Sites that are underutilizing preventive services are unable or unwilling to independently implement the PPIP program. CONCLUSIONS: Development of technical support may facilitate implementation of PPIP materials into those practices most deficient in providing preventive services. Given the diversity of practice environments it is unlikely that a "one size fits all" approach will ever be able to address the needs of all providers.
Authors: Kimberly S H Yarnall; Kathryn I Pollak; Truls Østbye; Katrina M Krause; J Lloyd Michener Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Ann C Klassen; John Creswell; Vicki L Plano Clark; Katherine Clegg Smith; Helen I Meissner Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-02-04 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: John A Batsis; John A Naslund; Alexandra B Zagaria; David Kotz; Rachel Dokko; Stephen J Bartels; Elizabeth Carpenter-Song Journal: J Nutr Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2019-04-11