Literature DB >> 9774287

Randomised trial of educational visits to enhance use of systematic reviews in 25 obstetric units.

J C Wyatt1, S Paterson-Brown, R Johanson, D G Altman, M J Bradburn, N M Fisk.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational visit to help obstetricians and midwives select and use evidence from a Cochrane database containing 600 systematic reviews.
DESIGN: Randomised single blind controlled trial with obstetric units allocated to an educational visit or control group.
SETTING: 25 of the 26 district general obstetric units in two former NHS regions.
SUBJECTS: The senior obstetrician and midwife from each intervention unit participated in educational visits. Clinical practices of all staff were assessed in 4508 pregnancies. INTERVENTION: Single informal educational visit by a respected obstetrician including discussion of evidence based obstetrics, guidance on implementation, and donation of Cochrane database and other materials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of perineal suturing with polyglycolic acid, ventouse delivery, prophylactic antibiotics in caesarean section, and steroids in preterm delivery, before and 9 months after visits, and concordance of guidelines with review evidence for same marker practices before and after visits.
RESULTS: Rates varied greatly, but the overall baseline mean of 43% (986/2312) increased to 54% (1189/2196) 9 months later. Rates of ventouse delivery increased significantly in intervention units but not in control units; there was no difference between the two types of units in uptake of other practices. Pooling rates from all 25 units, use of antibiotics in caesarean section and use of polyglycolic acid sutures increased significantly over the period, but use of steroids in preterm delivery was unchanged. Labour ward guidelines seldom agreed with evidence at baseline; this hardly improved after visits. Educational visits cost pound860 each (at 1995 prices).
CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable uptake of evidence into practice in both control and intervention units between 1994 and 1995. Our educational visits added little to this, despite the informal setting, targeting of senior staff from two disciplines, and donation of educational materials. Further work is needed to define cost effective methods to enhance the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and to clarify leadership and roles of senior obstetric staff in implementing the evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9774287      PMCID: PMC28686          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.317.7165.1041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  24 in total

1.  Relationships between knowledge and experience in the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic agents. A study of primary care practitioners.

Authors:  J K Stross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-11-17       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Does a mailed continuing education program improve physician performance? Results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care.

Authors:  C E Evans; R B Haynes; N J Birkett; J R Gilbert; D W Taylor; D L Sackett; M E Johnston; S A Hewson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986 Jan 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Uptake of meta-analytical overviews of effective care in English obstetric units.

Authors:  S Paterson-Brown; N M Fisk; J C Wyatt
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1995-04

5.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't.

Authors:  D L Sackett; W M Rosenberg; J A Gray; R B Haynes; W S Richardson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-01-13

6.  Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies.

Authors:  D A Davis; M A Thomson; A D Oxman; R B Haynes
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-09-06       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice.

Authors:  A D Oxman; M A Thomson; D A Davis; R B Haynes
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1995-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Detecting differences in quality of care: the sensitivity of measures of process and outcome in treating acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J Mant; N Hicks
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-09-23

9.  Choosing the correct unit of analysis in Medical Care experiments.

Authors:  Q E Whiting-O'Keefe; C Henke; D W Simborg
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  A controlled trial of educational visiting to improve benzodiazepine prescribing in general practice.

Authors:  S de Burgh; A Mant; R P Mattick; N Donnelly; W Hall; C Bridges-Webb
Journal:  Aust J Public Health       Date:  1995-04
View more
  22 in total

1.  Designing trials of interventions to change professional practice in primary care: lessons from an exploratory study of two change strategies.

Authors:  S Rogers; C Humphrey; I Nazareth; S Lister; Z Tomlin; A Haines
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-10

2.  Value of educational visits in obstetrics. Randomised controlled trial was unsuitable evaluation.

Authors:  J Pannikar; A Farkas
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-04-24

Review 3.  Intuition and evidence--uneasy bedfellows?

Authors:  Trisha Greenhalgh
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Randomised trials useful to find best methods of enhancing clinical practice.

Authors:  J C Wyatt; S Paterson-Brown; N M Fisk; R Johanson; D G Altman; M Bradburn
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-05-15

5.  Do clinicians use online evidence to support patient care? A study of 55,000 clinicians.

Authors:  Johanna I Westbrook; A Sophie Gosling; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003-12-07       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.

Authors:  Marion K Campbell; Diana R Elbourne; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-03-20

Review 7.  Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews in clinical decision-making: a systematic review.

Authors:  Laure Perrier; Kelly Mrklas; Sasha Shepperd; Maureen Dobbins; K Ann McKibbon; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-10-16       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 8.  Planning and studying improvement in patient care: the use of theoretical perspectives.

Authors:  Richard P T M Grol; Marije C Bosch; Marlies E J L Hulscher; Martin P Eccles; Michel Wensing
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.911

9.  Changing practice in maternity care: it's hard to know what works.

Authors:  M J Keirse
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-17

10.  The case for randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of clinical information systems.

Authors:  Joseph L Y Liu; Jeremy C Wyatt
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.