Improving care after myocardial infarction using a 2-year internet-delivered intervention: the Department of Veterans Affairs myocardial infarction-plus cluster-randomized trial

Implementing adaptive e-learning for newborn care in Tanzania: an observational study of provider engagement and knowledge gains

INTRODUCTION

To improve healthcare provider knowledge of Tanzanian newborn care guidelines, we developed adaptive Essential and Sick Newborn Care (aESNC), an adaptive e-learning environment. The objectives of this study were to (1) assess implementation success with use of in-person support and nudging strategy and (2) describe baseline provider knowledge and metacognition.

METHODS

6-month observational study at one zonal hospital and three health centres in Mwanza, Tanzania. To assess implementation success, we used the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework and to describe baseline provider knowledge and metacognition we used Howell's conscious-competence model. Additionally, we explored provider characteristics associated with initial learning completion or persistent activity.

RESULTS

aESNC reached 85% (195/231) of providers: 75 medical, 53 nursing and 21 clinical officers; 110 (56%) were at the zonal hospital and 85 (44%) at health centres. Median clinical experience was 4 years (IQR 1-9) and 45 (23%) had previous in-service training for both newborn essential and sick newborn care. Efficacy was 42% (SD ±17%). Providers averaged 78% (SD ±31%) completion of initial learning and 7% (SD ±11%) of refresher assignments. 130 (67%) providers had ≥1 episode of inactivity >30 day, no episodes were due to lack of internet access. Baseline conscious-competence was 53% (IQR: 38%-63%), unconscious-incompetence 32% (IQR: 23%-42%), conscious-incompetence 7% (IQR: 2%-15%), and unconscious-competence 2% (IQR: 0%-3%). Higher baseline conscious-competence (OR 31.6 (95% CI 5.8 to 183.5)) and being a nursing officer (aOR: 5.6 (95% CI 1.8 to 18.1)), compared with medical officer, were associated with initial learning completion or persistent activity.

CONCLUSION

aESNC reach was high in a population of frontline providers across diverse levels of care in Tanzania. Use of in-person support and nudging increased reach, initial learning and refresher assignment completion, but refresher assignment completion remains low. Providers were often unaware of knowledge gaps, and lower baseline knowledge may decrease initial learning completion or activity. Further study to identify barriers to adaptive e-learning normalisation is needed.

Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions

BACKGROUND

Chronic disease management (CDM) through sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions ensures long-term, high-quality care. We assessed implementation of KT interventions for supporting CDM and their efficacy when sustained in older adults.

METHODS

Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis engaging 17 knowledge users using integrated KT.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adults (> 65 years old) with chronic disease(s), their caregivers, health and/or policy-decision makers receiving a KT intervention to carry out a CDM intervention for at least 12 months (versus other KT interventions or usual care).

INFORMATION SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from each database's inception to March 2020.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Sustainability, fidelity, adherence of KT interventions for CDM practice, quality of life (QOL) and quality of care (QOC). Data extraction, risk of bias (ROB) assessment: We screened, abstracted and appraised articles (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care ROB tool) independently and in duplicate.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and estimated mean differences (MDs) for continuous and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data.

RESULTS

We included 158 RCTs (973,074 participants [961,745 patients, 5540 caregivers, 5789 providers]) and 39 companion reports comprising 329 KT interventions, involving patients (43.2%), healthcare providers (20.7%) or both (10.9%). We identified 16 studies described as assessing sustainability in 8.1% interventions, 67 studies as assessing adherence in 35.6% interventions and 20 studies as assessing fidelity in 8.7% of the interventions. Most meta-analyses suggested that KT interventions improved QOL, but imprecisely (36 item Short-Form mental [SF-36 mental]: MD 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] [- 1.25, 3.47], 14 RCTs, 5876 participants, I2 = 96%; European QOL-5 dimensions: MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.01, 0.02], 15 RCTs, 6628 participants, I2 = 25%; St George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MD - 2.12, 95% CI [- 3.72, - 0.51] 44 12 RCTs, 2893 participants, I2 = 44%). KT interventions improved QOC (OR 1.55, 95% CI [1.29, 1.85], 12 RCTS, 5271 participants, I2 = 21%).

CONCLUSIONS

KT intervention sustainability was infrequently defined and assessed. Sustained KT interventions have the potential to improve QOL and QOC in older adults with CDM. However, their overall efficacy remains uncertain and it varies by effect modifiers, including intervention type, chronic disease number, comorbidities, and participant age.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018084810.

Feasibility of an Adaptive E-Learning Environment to Improve Provider Proficiency in Essential and Sick Newborn Care in Mwanza, Tanzania

Introduction

To improve healthcare provider knowledge of Tanzanian newborn care guidelines, we developed adaptive Essential and Sick Newborn Care (aESNC), an adaptive e-learning environment (AEE). The objectives of this study were to 1) assess implementation success with use of in-person support and nudging strategy and 2) describe baseline provider knowledge and metacognition.

Methods

6-month observational study at 1 zonal hospital and 3 health centers in Mwanza, Tanzania. To assess implementation success, we used the RE-AIM framework and to describe baseline provider knowledge and metacognition we used Howell's conscious-competence model. Additionally, we explored provider characteristics associated with initial learning completion or persistent activity.

Results

aESNC reached 85% (195/231) of providers: 75 medical, 53 nursing, and 21 clinical officers; 110 (56%) were at the zonal hospital and 85 (44%) at health centers. Median clinical experience was 4 years [IQR 1,9] and 45 (23%) had previous in-service training for both newborn essential and sick newborn care. Efficacy was 42% (SD±17%). Providers averaged 78% (SD±31%) completion of initial learning and 7%(SD±11%) of refresher assignments. 130 (67%) providers had ≥1 episode of inactivity >30 day, no episodes were due to lack of internet access. Baseline conscious-competence was 53% [IQR:38-63%], unconscious-incompetence 32% [IQR:23-42%], conscious-incompetence 7% [IQR:2-15%], and unconscious-competence 2% [IQR:0-3%]. Higher baseline conscious-competence (OR 31.6 [95%CI:5.8, 183.5) and being a nursing officer (aOR: 5.6 [95%CI:1.8, 18.1]), compared to medical officer) were associated with initial learning completion or persistent activity.

Conclusion

aESNC reach was high in a population of frontline providers across diverse levels of care in Tanzania. Use of in-person support and nudging increased reach, initial learning, and refresher assignment completion, but refresher assignment completion remains low. Providers were often unaware of knowledge gaps, and lower baseline knowledge may decrease initial learning completion or activity. Further study to identify barriers to adaptive e-learning normalization is needed.

Effectiveness of electronic learning for continuing interprofessional education on behavior change of healthcare professionals: A scoping review

Electronic learning (e-learning) for continuing professional education (CPE) in healthcare has been shown to improve learners' satisfaction, attitudes, and performance. E-learning outcomes for continuing interprofessional education (CIPE) are less known, and the features of electronic CIPE programs that promote behavior change are unclear. In this scoping review, we sought to identify the program features and areas of behavior change in healthcare professionals using e-learning for CIPE. PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library databases, and Google/Google Scholar were searched for all English articles published in the last 10 years. From the 32 studies included in our review, eight types of e-learning methods were identified. More than 35,542 healthcare professionals of different professions had participated in the programs. Thirty studies demonstrated positive behavior changes, with four areas of behavior changes identified. The most common area of change was in patient care practices. Five common program features facilitating behavior change were also identified. Most successful programs provided interactive and authentic learning experiences, which promoted direct clinical application. Future researche should include monitoring of sustained behavior changes at work, linked to patient outcomes.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Computer-Based Education Platform, Pharmacy5in5, on Pharmacists’ Knowledge of Anticholinergic Toxicity Using a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Computer-based education has been widely implemented in healthcare professional development education. However, there has been little examination of the potential for computer-based education to enhance pharmacists’ knowledge. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of computer-based education on improving pharmacists’ knowledge compared to printed education material. Methods: This study was a web-based randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomly allocated to either an intervention group where they had access to the computer-based education module on Pharmacy5in5.ca or to a control group where they had access to printed educational material. Knowledge gain was assessed using a pre- and post-knowledge test. Results: A total of 120 pharmacists were recruited and 101 completed the post-knowledge test (50/60 in the intervention group; 51/60 in the control group). Both groups showed a significant increase in knowledge gain (intervention group: pre-test mean score 19.35 ± 3.56, post-test mean score 22.42 ± 3.812, p value < 0.001; control group pre-test mean score 19.22 ± 3.45, post-test mean score 23.29 ± 3.087, p value < 0.001). However, the difference in knowledge change was not significant between the two groups (22.42 vs. 23.29, p value = 0.333). Conclusions: In this study, a computer-based education module enhanced pharmacists’ knowledge to a similar degree to printed education material. Efforts should be made to provide computer-based education as an option to support pharmacists’ professional development.

E-learning to teach medical students about acute otitis media: A randomized controlled trial

Objectives

Acute otitis media (AOM) is extremely prevalent among children but its diagnosis remains challenging. Our primary objective was to measure the impact of an e-learning module on medical students' accuracy in diagnosing paediatric AOM.

Methods

This randomized controlled trial was performed at a single tertiary care paediatric emergency department (ED). Medical students on their paediatric rotation were randomized to a locally developed e-learning module or a small-group lecture on AOM. They then had to examine at least 10 ears of patients at risk for AOM. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy and secondary outcomes included knowledge test scores and learning modality preference.

Results

Between May 2017 and September 2018, 201 medical students were randomized. Eighty-three evaluated at least 10 ears and were included in the primary analysis. Diagnostic accuracies (76.5% for the e-learning group versus 76.4% for the lecture group, difference of 0.1%; 95%CI: -6.2 to 6.4%) and post-test scores (difference of 0.5/20 points; 95%CI: -0.8 to 1.2/20 points) were similar between the groups. Sixty-two per cent of participants preferred the e-learning module to the lecture, while 15% had no preference.

Conclusions

Diagnostic accuracy for AOM was similar between students exposed to an e-learning module or a small-group lecture. E-learning was the preferred learning modality.

Reporting non-adherence in cluster randomised trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Treatment non-adherence in randomised trials refers to situations where some participants do not receive their allocated treatment as intended. For cluster randomised trials, where the unit of randomisation is a group of participants, non-adherence may occur at the cluster or individual level. When non-adherence occurs, randomisation no longer guarantees that the relationship between treatment receipt and outcome is unconfounded, and the power to detect the treatment effects in intention-to-treat analysis may be reduced. Thus, recording adherence and estimating the causal treatment effect adequately are of interest for clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent of reporting of non-adherence issues in published cluster trials and to establish which methods are currently being used for addressing non-adherence, if any, and whether clustering is accounted for in these.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed 132 cluster trials published in English in 2011 previously identified through a search in PubMed.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty three cluster trials were included in this systematic review. Non-adherence was reported in 56 cluster trials. Among these, 19 reported a treatment efficacy estimate: per protocol in 15 and as treated in 4. No study discussed the assumptions made by these methods, their plausibility or the sensitivity of the results to deviations from these assumptions.

LIMITATIONS

The year of publication of the cluster trials included in this review (2011) could be considered a limitation of this study; however, no new guidelines regarding the reporting and the handling of non-adherence for cluster trials have been published since. In addition, a single reviewer undertook the data extraction. To mitigate this, a second reviewer conducted a validation of the extraction process on 15 randomly selected reports. Agreement was satisfactory (93%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the recommendations of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement extension to cluster randomised trials, treatment adherence is under-reported. Among the trials providing adherence information, there was substantial variation in how adherence was defined, handled and reported. Researchers should discuss the assumptions required for the results to be interpreted causally and whether these are scientifically plausible in their studies. Sensitivity analyses to study the robustness of the results to departures from these assumptions should be performed.

E-learning for health professionals

BACKGROUND

The use of e-learning, defined as any educational intervention mediated electronically via the Internet, has steadily increased among health professionals worldwide. Several studies have attempted to measure the effects of e-learning in medical practice, which has often been associated with large positive effects when compared to no intervention and with small positive effects when compared with traditional learning (without access to e-learning). However, results are not conclusive.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of e-learning programmes versus traditional learning in licensed health professionals for improving patient outcomes or health professionals' behaviours, skills and knowledge.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and three trial registers up to July 2016, without any restrictions based on language or status of publication. We examined the reference lists of the included studies and other relevant reviews. If necessary, we contacted the study authors to collect additional information on studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of e-learning versus traditional learning for health professionals. We excluded non-randomised trials and trials involving undergraduate health professionals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We graded the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach and standardised the outcome effects using relative risks (risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR)) or standardised mean difference (SMD) when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 randomised trials involving 5679 licensed health professionals (4759 mixed health professionals, 587 nurses, 300 doctors and 33 childcare health consultants).When compared with traditional learning at 12-month follow-up, low-certainty evidence suggests that e-learning may make little or no difference for the following patient outcomes: the proportion of patients with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of less than 100 mg/dL (adjusted difference 4.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.3 to 7.9, N = 6399 patients, 1 study) and the proportion with glycated haemoglobin level of less than 8% (adjusted difference 4.6%, 95% CI -1.5 to 9.8, 3114 patients, 1 study). At 3- to 12-month follow-up, low-certainty evidence indicates that e-learning may make little or no difference on the following behaviours in health professionals: screening for dyslipidaemia (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.06, 6027 patients, 2 studies) and treatment for dyslipidaemia (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.48, 5491 patients, 2 studies). It is uncertain whether e-learning improves or reduces health professionals' skills (2912 health professionals; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence), and it may make little or no difference in health professionals' knowledge (3236 participants; 11 studies; low-certainty evidence).Due to the paucity of studies and data, we were unable to explore differences in effects across different subgroups. Owing to poor reporting, we were unable to collect sufficient information to complete a meaningful 'Risk of bias' assessment for most of the quality criteria. We evaluated the risk of bias as unclear for most studies, but we classified the largest trial as being at low risk of bias. Missing data represented a potential source of bias in several studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared to traditional learning, e-learning may make little or no difference in patient outcomes or health professionals' behaviours, skills or knowledge. Even if e-learning could be more successful than traditional learning in particular medical education settings, general claims of it as inherently more effective than traditional learning may be misleading.

Enhancing prescribing of guideline-recommended medications for ischaemic heart diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions targeted at healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES

Ischaemic heart diseases (IHDs) are a leading cause of death worldwide. Although prescribing according to guidelines improves health outcomes, it remains suboptimal. We determined whether interventions targeted at healthcare professionals are effective to enhance prescribing and health outcomes in patients with IHDs.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between 1 January 2000 and 31 August 2017. We included original studies of interventions targeted at healthcare professionals to enhance prescribing guideline-recommended medications for IHDs. We only included randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Main outcomes were the proportion of eligible patients receiving guideline-recommended medications, the proportion of patients achieving target blood pressure and target low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)/cholesterol level and mortality rate. Meta-analyses were performed using the inverse-variance method and the random effects model. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

We included 13 studies, 4 RCTs (1869 patients) and 9 cluster RCTs (15 224 patients). 11 out of 13 studies were performed in North America and Europe. Interventions were of organisational or professional nature. The interventions significantly enhanced prescribing of statins/lipid-lowering agents (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.42, P=0.004), but not other medications (aspirin/antiplatelet agents, beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers and the composite of medications). There was no significant association between the interventions and improved health outcomes (target LDL-C and mortality) except for target blood pressure (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.93; P=0.008). The evidence was of moderate or high quality for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Organisational and professional interventions improved prescribing of statins/lipid-lowering agents and target blood pressure in patients with IHDs but there was little evidence of change in other outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016039188.

Patient education in the management of coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the single most common cause of death globally. However, with falling CHD mortality rates, an increasing number of people live with CHD and may need support to manage their symptoms and improve prognosis. Cardiac rehabilitation is a complex multifaceted intervention which aims to improve the health outcomes of people with CHD. Cardiac rehabilitation consists of three core modalities: education, exercise training and psychological support. This is an update of a Cochrane systematic review previously published in 2011, which aims to investigate the specific impact of the educational component of cardiac rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the effects of patient education delivered as part of cardiac rehabilitation, compared with usual care on mortality, morbidity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare costs in patients with CHD.2. To explore the potential study level predictors of the effects of patient education in patients with CHD (e.g. individual versus group intervention, timing with respect to index cardiac event).

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches from the previous Cochrane review, by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library, Issue 6, 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO) in June 2016. Three trials registries, previous systematic reviews and reference lists of included studies were also searched. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

1. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the primary interventional intent was education delivered as part of cardiac rehabilitation.2. Studies with a minimum of six-months follow-up and published in 1990 or later.3. Adults with a diagnosis of CHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all identified references for inclusion based on the above inclusion criteria. One author extracted study characteristics from the included trials and assessed their risk of bias; a second review author checked data. Two independent reviewers extracted outcome data onto a standardised collection form. For dichotomous variables, risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were derived for each outcome. Heterogeneity amongst included studies was explored qualitatively and quantitatively. Where appropriate and possible, results from included studies were combined for each outcome to give an overall estimate of treatment effect. Given the degree of clinical heterogeneity seen in participant selection, interventions and comparators across studies, we decided it was appropriate to pool studies using random-effects modelling. We planned to undertake subgroup analysis and stratified meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis and meta-regression to examine potential treatment effect modifiers. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence and the GRADE profiler (GRADEpro GDT) to create summary of findings tables.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included a total of 22 trials which randomised 76,864 people with CHD to an education intervention or a 'no education' comparator. Nine new trials (8215 people) were included for this update. We judged most included studies as low risk of bias across most domains. Educational 'dose' ranged from one 40 minute face-to-face session plus a 15 minute follow-up call, to a four-week residential stay with 11 months of follow-up sessions. Control groups received usual medical care, typically consisting of referral to an outpatient cardiologist, primary care physician, or both.We found evidence of no difference in effect of education-based interventions on total mortality (13 studies, 10,075 participants; 189/5187 (3.6%) versus 222/4888 (4.6%); random effects risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.05; moderate quality evidence). Individual causes of mortality were reported rarely, and we were unable to report separate results for cardiovascular mortality or non-cardiovascular mortality. There was evidence of no difference in effect of education-based interventions on fatal and/or non fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (2 studies, 209 participants; 7/107 (6.5%) versus 12/102 (11.8%); random effects RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.48; very low quality of evidence). However, there was some evidence of a reduction with education in fatal and/or non-fatal cardiovascular events (2 studies, 310 studies; 21/152 (13.8%) versus 61/158 (38.6%); random effects RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.56; low quality evidence). There was evidence of no difference in effect of education on the rate of total revascularisations (3 studies, 456 participants; 5/228 (2.2%) versus 8/228 (3.5%); random effects RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.71; very low quality evidence) or hospitalisations (5 studies, 14,849 participants; 656/10048 (6.5%) versus 381/4801 (7.9%); random effects RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21; very low quality evidence). There was evidence of no difference between groups for all cause withdrawal (17 studies, 10,972 participants; 525/5632 (9.3%) versus 493/5340 (9.2%); random effects RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.22; low quality evidence). Although some health-related quality of life (HRQoL) domain scores were higher with education, there was no consistent evidence of superiority across all domains.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no reduction in total mortality, in people who received education delivered as part of cardiac rehabilitation, compared to people in control groups (moderate quality evidence). There were no improvements in fatal or non fatal MI, total revascularisations or hospitalisations, with education. There was some evidence of a reduction in fatal and/or non-fatal cardiovascular events with education, but this was based on only two studies. There was also some evidence to suggest that education-based interventions may improve HRQoL. Our findings are supportive of current national and international clinical guidelines that cardiac rehabilitation for people with CHD should be comprehensive and include educational interventions together with exercise and psychological therapy. Further definitive research into education interventions for people with CHD is needed.

Internet-based interventions for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND

The Internet could provide a means of delivering secondary prevention programmes to people with coronary heart disease (CHD).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of Internet-based interventions targeting lifestyle changes and medicines management for the secondary prevention of CHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, in December 2014. We also searched six other databases in October 2014, and three trials registers in January 2015 together with reference checking and handsearching to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating Internet-delivered secondary prevention interventions aimed at people with CHD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We assessed evidence quality using the GRADE approach and presented this in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Eleven studies are complete (1392 participants), and seven are ongoing. Of the completed studies, seven interventions are broad, targeting the lifestyle management of CHD, and four focused on physical activity promotion. The comparison group in trials was usual care (n = 6), minimal intervention (n = 3), or traditional cardiac rehabilitation (n = 2).We found no effects of Internet-based interventions for all-cause mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 1.63; participants = 895; studies = 6; low-quality evidence). There was only one case of cardiovascular mortality in a control group (participants = 895; studies = 6). No incidences of non-fatal re-infarction were reported across any of the studies. We found no effects for revascularisation (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.27; participants = 895; studies = 6; low-quality evidence).We found no effects for total cholesterol (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.28; participants = 439; studies = 4; low-quality evidence), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.07; participants = 437; studies = 4; low-quality evidence), or triglycerides (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.19; participants = 439; studies = 4; low-quality evidence). We did not pool the data for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol due to considerable heterogeneity. Two out of six trials measuring LDL cholesterol detected favourable intervention effects, and four trials reported no effects. Seven studies measured systolic and diastolic blood pressure; we did not pool the data due to substantial heterogeneity. For systolic blood pressure, two studies showed a reduction with the intervention, but the remaining studies showed no effect. For diastolic blood pressure, two studies showed a reduction with the intervention, one study showed an increase with the intervention, and the remaining four studies showed no effect.Five trials measured health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We could draw no conclusions from one study due to incomplete reporting; one trial reported no effect; two studies reported a short- and medium-term effect respectively; and one study reported both short- and medium-term effects.Five trials assessed dietary outcomes: two reported favourable effects, and three reported no effects. Eight studies assessed physical activity: five of these trials reported no physical activity effects, and three reported effectiveness. Trials are yet to measure the impact of these interventions on compliance with medication.Two studies measured healthcare utilisation: one reported no effects, and the other reported increased usage of healthcare services compared to a control group in the intervention group at nine months' follow-up. Two trials collected cost data: both reported that Internet-delivered interventions are likely to be cost-effective.In terms of the risk of bias, the majority of studies reported appropriate randomisation and appropriate concealment of randomisation processes. A lack of blinding resulted in a risk of performance bias in seven studies, and a risk of detection bias in five trials. Two trials were at risk of attrition bias, and five were at risk for reporting bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In general, evidence was of low quality due to lack of blinding, loss to follow-up, and uncertainty around the effect size. Few studies measured clinical events, and of those that did, a very small number of events were reported, and therefore no firm conclusions can be made. Similarly, there was no clear evidence of effect for cardiovascular risk factors, although again the number of studies reporting these was small. There was some evidence for beneficial effects on HRQOL, dietary outcomes, and physical activity, although firm conclusions cannot yet be made. The effects on healthcare utilisation and cost-effectiveness are also inconclusive, and trials are yet to measure the impact of Internet interventions on compliance with medication. The comparison groups differed across trials, and there were insufficient studies with usable data for subgroup analyses. We intend to study the intensity of comparison groups in future updates of this review when more evidence is available. The completion of the ongoing trials will add to the evidence base.

Interventions to improve adherence to cardiovascular disease guidelines: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Successful management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is impaired by poor adherence to clinical practice guidelines. The objective of our review was to synthesize evidence about the effectiveness of interventions that target healthcare providers to improve adherence to CVD guidelines and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science and CINAHL databases from inception to June 2014, using search terms related to adherence and clinical practice guidelines. Studies were limited to randomized controlled trials testing an intervention to improve adherence to guidelines that measured both a patient and adherence outcome. Descriptive summary tables were created from data extractions. Meta-analyses were conducted on clinically homogeneous comparisons, and sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were carried out where possible. GRADE summary of findings tables were created for each comparison and outcome.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We included 38 RCTs in our review. Interventions included guideline dissemination, education, audit and feedback, and academic detailing. Meta-analyses were conducted for several outcomes by intervention type. Many comparisons favoured the intervention, though only the adherence outcome for the education intervention showed statistically significant improvement compared to usual care (standardized mean difference = 0.58 [95 % confidence interval 0.35 to 0.8]).

CONCLUSIONS

Many interventions show promise to improve practitioner adherence to CVD guidelines. The quality of evidence and number of trials limited our ability to draw conclusions.

The Origin of Variation in Primary Care Process and Outcome Indicators: Patients, Professionals, Centers, and Health Districts

Healthcare providers are often evaluated by studying variability in their indicators. However, the usefulness of this analysis may be limited if we do not distinguish the variability attributable to health professionals and organizations from that associated with their patients.Our objectives are to describe the main process and outcome indicators of primary healthcare services, analyzing the contribution to variability in these indicators from different levels: individual, health professional, health center, and health district.This is a cross-sectional study that includes all.All the individuals covered by the public Basque Health Service (children [age 0-13], n = 247,493; adults [≥14 years old], n = 1,959,682) over a 12-month period.We calculated the number of visits to primary care doctors, number of referrals, prescription costs, and potentially avoidable hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs). Using multilevel analysis, we determined the percentage of variance attributable to each level.After adjusting for the characteristics of patients (demographic, socioeconomic, and morbidity), doctors (panel size), health center (size, staff satisfaction, demographic structure of the community), and health district, the variance in the indicators was mainly attributable to differences between patients, independently of the attending health professional, the center, or the healthcare organization, both in children (94.21% for visits to the doctor; 96.66% for referrals; 98.57% for prescription costs; 90.02% for potentially avoidable hospitalizations for ACSCs) and in adults (88.10%; 96.26%; 97.92%; and 93.77%, respectively).The limited contribution of health professionals and organizations to variability in indicators should be taken into account when performing evaluations and planning quality improvement strategies.

Meta-regression analyses to explain statistical heterogeneity in a systematic review of strategies for guideline implementation in primary health care

This study is an in-depth-analysis to explain statistical heterogeneity in a systematic review of implementation strategies to improve guideline adherence of primary care physicians in the treatment of patients with cardiovascular diseases. The systematic review included randomized controlled trials from a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, conference proceedings and registers of ongoing studies. Implementation strategies were shown to be effective with substantial heterogeneity of treatment effects across all investigated strategies. Primary aim of this study was to explain different effects of eligible trials and to identify methodological and clinical effect modifiers. Random effects meta-regression models were used to simultaneously assess the influence of multimodal implementation strategies and effect modifiers on physician adherence. Effect modifiers included the staff responsible for implementation, level of prevention and definition pf the primary outcome, unit of randomization, duration of follow-up and risk of bias. Six clinical and methodological factors were investigated as potential effect modifiers of the efficacy of different implementation strategies on guideline adherence in primary care practices on the basis of information from 75 eligible trials. Five effect modifiers were able to explain a substantial amount of statistical heterogeneity. Physician adherence was improved by 62% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 29 to 104%) or 29% (95% CI 5 to 60%) in trials where other non-medical professionals or nurses were included in the implementation process. Improvement of physician adherence was more successful in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases by around 30% (30%; 95% CI -2 to 71% and 31%; 95% CI 9 to 57%, respectively) compared to tertiary prevention. This study aimed to identify effect modifiers of implementation strategies on physician adherence. Especially the cooperation of different health professionals in primary care practices might increase efficacy and guideline implementation seems to be more difficult in tertiary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.

Dissemination and implementation of comparative effectiveness evidence: key informant interviews with Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions

AIM

To identify ongoing practices and opportunities for improving national comparative effectiveness research (CER) translation through dissemination and implementation (D&I) via NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Key informant interviews were conducted with 18 CTSA grantees sampled to represent a range of D&I efforts.

RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS

The institutional representatives endorsed fostering CER translation nationally via the CTSA Consortium. However, five themes emerged from the interviews as barriers to CER D&I: lack of institutional awareness, insufficient capacity, lack of established D&I methods, confusion among stakeholders about what CER actually is and limited funding opportunities. Interviewees offered two key recommendations to improve CER translation: development of a centralized clearing house to facilitate the diffusion of CER D&I resources and methods across CTSA institutions; and formalization of the national CTSA network to leverage existing community engagement relationships and resources for the purpose of adapting and disseminating robust CER evidence locally with providers, patients and healthcare systems.

Strategies for guideline implementation in primary care focusing on patients with cardiovascular disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guidelines should reduce inappropriate practice and improve the efficiency of treatment. Not only methodological quality but also acceptance and successful implementation in daily practice are crucial for the benefit on patients. Focusing on cardiovascular diseases (CVD), it is still unclear which implementation strategy can improve physician adherence to the recommendations of guidelines in primary care.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials about guideline implementation strategies on CVD. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, conference proceedings and registers of ongoing studies were searched.

RESULTS

Eighty-four trials met our predefined inclusion criteria, of them 54 trials compared unimodal strategies and 30 multimodal strategies to usual care. Concerning unimodal strategies, 15 trials investigated provider reminder systems, 3 audit and feedback, 15 provider education, 4 patient education, 5 promotion of self-management and 14 organizational change. The strongest benefit of a unimodal implementation strategy was found due to organizational change (odds ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.4 to 2.75), followed by patient education, provider education and provider reminder systems. Trials on the efficacy of audit and feedback and patient self-management showed differing results or small advantages in terms of physician adherence. Multimodal interventions showed almost similar effect measures and ranking of strategies.

CONCLUSION

The use of implementation strategies for the distribution of guidelines on CVD can be convincingly effective on physician adherence, regardless whether based on a unimodal or multimodal design. Three distinct strategies should be well considered in such an attempt: organizational changes in the primary care team, patient education and provider education.

Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Patient trust in personal medical information is critical to increasing adherence to physician recommendations and medications. One of the anticipated benefits of learning of one's genomic risk for common diseases is the increased adoption of screening, preventive care and lifestyle changes. However, the equivocal results thus far reported of the positive impact of knowledge of genomic risk on behavior change may be due to lack of patients' trust in the results. As part of a clinical study to compare two methods of communication of genomic risk results for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we assessed patients' trust and preferred methods of delivery of genomic risk information. A total of 300 participants recruited from the general public in Durham, NC were randomized to receive their genomic risk for T2DM in-person from a genetic counselor or online through the testing company's web-site. Participants completed a baseline survey and three follow-up surveys after receiving results. Overall, participants reported high levels of trust in the test results. Participants who received their results in-person from the genetic counselor were significantly more likely to trust their results than those who reviewed their results on-line (p = 0.005). There was not a statistically significant difference in levels of trust among participants with increased genetic risk, as compared to other those with decreased or same as population risk (p = 0.1154). In the event they undergo genomic risk testing again, 55 % of participants overall indicated they would prefer to receive their results online compared to 28 % that would prefer to receive future results in-person. Of those participants preferring to receive results online, 77 % indicated they would prefer to have the option to speak to someone if they had questions with the online results (compared to accessing results online without the option of professional consultation). This is the first study to assess satisfaction with genomic risk testing by the method of delivery of the test result. The higher rate of trust in results delivered in-person suggests that online access reports may not result in serious consideration of results and lack of adoption of recommended preventive recommendations.