A controlled trial to improve delivery of preventive care: physician or patient reminders?

Protocol for the pilot randomized trial of the CArdiovascular Risk assEssment for Rheumatoid Arthritis (CARE RA) intervention: a peer coach behavioral intervention

Background

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death among people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with an estimated increased risk of 50–60% compared to the general population. Lipid-lowering strategies have been shown to lower CVD risk significantly in people with RA and hyperlipidemia. Thus, CVD risk assessment has an important role to play in reducing CVD among people with RA. Yet currently only 37 to 45% of this population are receiving primary lipids screening. This paper describes the CArdiovascular Risk assEssment for RA (CARE RA) intervention, which is designed to address this issue. CARE RA is a peer coach intervention, that is, an intervention in which a person with RA coaches another person with RA, which is designed to educate people with RA about the relation between RA and CVD risk and to help them obtain evidence-based CVD risk assessment and treatment.

Methods

This is an open-label pilot study that will test if the participants assigned to complete the CARE RA curriculum with a peer coach will receive a cardiovascular risk assessment more frequently compared to those that complete the CARE RA curriculum by themselves. The CARE RA intervention is guided by Social Cognitive Theory. Participants in the peer coach intervention arm will receive the assistance of a peer coach who will call the participants once a week for 5 weeks to go over the CARE RA curriculum and train them on how to obtain CVD risk assessment. The control arm will complete the CARE RA curriculum without any assistance. Participants will be randomized 1:1 either to the control arm or to the peer coach intervention arm. The primary outcome is a participant’s having a CVD risk assessment or initiating a statin, if indicated. Secondary outcomes include patient activation and RA medication adherence. The RE-AIM implementation framework guides the implementation and evaluation of the intervention.

Discussion

This pilot study will test the feasibility of the peer coach intervention in anticipation of a larger trial. CARE RA pioneers the use of peer coaches to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines among people with RA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04488497. Registered on July 28, 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-022-01041-z.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 years and older varies by country and participant characteristics. This review updates versions published in 2010 and 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system, and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and ERIC for this update, as well as WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing studies to 7 December 2017. We also searched the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised trials of interventions to increase influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years or older in the community.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as specified by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new RCTs for this update (total 61 RCTs; 1,055,337 participants). Trials involved people aged 60 years and older living in the community in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited some meta-analyses. We assessed studies as at low risk of bias for randomisation (38%), allocation concealment (11%), blinding (44%), and selective reporting (100%). Half (51%) had missing data. We assessed the evidence as low-quality. We identified three levels of intervention intensity: low (e.g. postcards), medium (e.g. personalised phone calls), and high (e.g. home visits, facilitators).Increasing community demand (12 strategies, 41 trials, 53 study arms, 767,460 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed was client reminders or recalls by letter plus leaflet or postcard compared to reminder (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15; 3 studies; 64,200 participants). Successful interventions tested by single studies were patient outreach by retired teachers (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22); invitations by clinic receptionists (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76); nurses or pharmacists educating and nurses vaccinating patients (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67); medical students counselling patients (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.35); and multiple recall questionnaires (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.24).Some interventions could not be meta-analysed due to significant heterogeneity: 17 studies tested simple reminders (11 with 95% CI entirely above unity); 16 tested personalised reminders (12 with 95% CI entirely above unity); two investigated customised compared to form letters (both 95% CI above unity); and four studies examined the impact of health risk appraisals (all had 95% CI above unity). One study of a lottery for free groceries was not effective.Enhancing vaccination access (6 strategies, 8 trials, 10 arms, 9353 participants)We meta-analysed results from two studies of home visits (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61) and two studies that tested free vaccine compared to patient payment for vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82). We were unable to conduct meta-analyses of two studies of home visits by nurses plus a physician care plan (both with 95% CI above unity) and two studies of free vaccine compared to no intervention (both with 95% CI above unity). One study of group visits (OR 27.2, 95% CI 1.60 to 463.3) was effective, and one study of home visits compared to safety interventions was not.Provider- or system-based interventions (11 strategies, 15 trials, 17 arms, 278,524 participants)One successful intervention that could be meta-analysed focused on payments to physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77). Successful interventions tested by individual studies were: reminding physicians to vaccinate all patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); posters in clinics presenting vaccination rates and encouraging competition between doctors (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); and chart reviews and benchmarking to the rates achieved by the top 10% of physicians (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97).We were unable to meta-analyse four studies that looked at physician reminders (three studies with 95% CI above unity) and three studies of facilitator encouragement of vaccination (two studies with 95% CI above unity). Interventions that were not effective were: comparing letters on discharge from hospital to letters to general practitioners; posters plus postcards versus posters alone; educational reminders, academic detailing, and peer comparisons compared to mailed educational materials; educational outreach plus feedback to teams versus written feedback; and an intervention to increase staff vaccination rates.Interventions at the societal levelNo studies reported on societal-level interventions.Study funding sourcesStudies were funded by government health organisations (n = 33), foundations (n = 9), organisations that provided healthcare services in the studies (n = 3), and a pharmaceutical company offering free vaccines (n = 1). Fifteen studies did not report study funding sources.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified interventions that demonstrated significant positive effects of low (postcards), medium (personalised phone calls), and high (home visits, facilitators) intensity that increase community demand for vaccination, enhance access, and improve provider/system response. The overall GRADE assessment of the evidence was moderate quality. Conclusions are unchanged from the 2014 review.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions.

Increasing referral rate for screening colonoscopy through patient education and activation at a primary care clinic in New York City

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer could be prevented through regular screening. Individuals age 50 and older are recommended to get screened via colonoscopy. Because physician referral is a major predictor of colonoscopy completion, two low-cost, evidence-based interventions were tested to increase referrals by activating patients to self-advocate.

METHODS

This study compared the impact of a pre-visit educational handout that prompts patients to discuss colonoscopy with their physician with the handout plus brief counseling through exit interviews and chart reviews. The main outcome was physician referral.

RESULTS

Medical charts were reviewed for eligibility: 130 control patients (Arm 1), 45 patients who received the educational handout and health counseling (Arm 2), and 50 patients who received only the handout (Arm 3). Colonoscopy referral rates increased from 24.6% in Arm 1 to 44.4% and 52.0% in Arms 2 and 3, respectively (p=0.001). The proportion of exit interview participants who discussed colonoscopy with their doctor increased from 68.8% in Arm 1 to 76.5% and 88.9% in Arms 2 and 3, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that both interventions are effective at increasing colonoscopy referrals.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Results suggest that an educational handout alone is sufficient in prompting patient-initiated discussions about colonoscopy.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 and older is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May week 3 2014), EMBASE (1980 to June 2014), AgeLine (1978 to 4 June 2014), ERIC (1965 to June 2014) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted influenza vaccine uptake data.

MAIN RESULTS

This update identified 13 new RCTs; the review now includes a total of 57 RCTs with 896,531 participants. The trials included community-dwelling seniors in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited meta-analysis. The percentage of trials with low risk of bias for each domain was as follows: randomisation (33%); allocation concealment (11%); blinding (44%); missing data (49%) and selective reporting (100%). Increasing community demand (32 trials, 10 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: three trials (n = 64,200) of letter plus leaflet/postcard compared to letter (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15); two trials (n = 614) of nurses/pharmacists educating plus vaccinating patients (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.66); single trials of a phone call from a senior (n = 193) (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22), a telephone invitation versus clinic drop-in (n = 243) (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76), a free groceries lottery (n = 291) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.76) and nurses educating and vaccinating patients (n = 485) (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67).We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: postcard/letter/pamphlets (16 trials, n = 592,165); tailored communications (16 trials, n = 388,164); customised letter/phone-call (four trials, n = 82,465) and client-based appraisals (three trials, n = 4016), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Enhancing vaccination access (10 trials, six strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2112) of home visits compared to clinic invitation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61); two trials (n = 2251) of free vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82) and one trial (n = 321) of patient group visits (OR 24.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 425.32). One trial (n = 350) of a home visit plus vaccine encouragement compared to a home visit plus safety advice was non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: nurse home visits (two trials, n = 2069) and free vaccine compared to no intervention (two trials, n = 2250). Provider- or system-based interventions (17 trials, 11 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2815) of paying physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77); one trial (n = 316) of reminding physicians about all their patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); one trial (n = 8376) of posters plus postcards (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); one trial (n = 1360) of chart review/feedback (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97) and one trial (n = 27,580) of educational outreach/feedback (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.81).Trials of posters plus postcards versus posters (n = 5753), academic detailing (n = 1400) and increasing staff vaccination rates (n = 26,432) were non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: reminding physicians (four trials, n = 202,264) and practice facilitators (three trials, n = 2183), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Interventions at the societal level We identified no RCTs of interventions at the societal level.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are interventions that are effective for increasing community demand for vaccination, enhancing access and improving provider/system response. Heterogeneity limited pooling of trials.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals; effects on professional practice and health care outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting the doctor to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes of care (related to healthcare professionals' practice) and outcomes of care (related to patients' health condition).

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the EPOC Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the following databases between June 11-19, 2012: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Library (Economics, Methods, and Health Technology Assessment sections), Issue 6, 2012; MEDLINE, OVID (1946- ), Daily Update, and In-process; EMBASE, Ovid (1947- ); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980- ); EPOC Specialised Register, Reference Manager, and INSPEC, Engineering Village. The authors reviewed reference lists of related reviews and studies. 

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual or cluster-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes and/or outcomes of care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. We contacted authors to obtain important missing information for studies that were published within the last 10 years. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median absolute improvement and interquartile range (IQR) in process adherence across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

In the 32 included studies, computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieved moderate improvement in professional practices, with a median improvement of processes of care of 7.0% (IQR: 3.9% to 16.4%). Implementing reminders alone improved care by 11.2% (IQR 6.5% to 19.6%) compared with usual care, while implementing reminders in addition to another intervention improved care by 4.0% only (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%) compared with the other intervention. The quality of evidence for these comparisons was rated as moderate according to the GRADE approach. Two reminder features were associated with larger effect sizes: providing space on the reminder for provider to enter a response (median 13.7% versus 4.3% for no response, P value = 0.01) and providing an explanation of the content or advice on the reminder (median 12.0% versus 4.2% for no explanation, P value = 0.02). Median improvement in processes of care also differed according to the behaviour the reminder targeted: for instance, reminders to vaccinate improved processes of care by 13.1% (IQR 12.2% to 20.7%) compared with other targeted behaviours. In the only study that had sufficient power to detect a clinically significant effect on outcomes of care, reminders were not associated with significant improvements.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieve moderate improvement in process of care. Two characteristics emerged as significant predictors of improvement: providing space on the reminder for a response from the clinician and providing an explanation of the reminder's content or advice. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can improve care in various settings under various conditions.

General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease

BACKGROUND

General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. These aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is, therefore, important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks with an emphasis on patient-relevant outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rather than on surrogate outcomes such as blood pressure and serum cholesterol levels.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Healthstar, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to July 2012. Two authors screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and read reference lists. One author used citation tracking (Web of Knowledge) and asked trialists about additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adults unselected for disease or risk factors. We did not include geriatric trials. We defined health checks as screening general populations for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. We contacted authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary. For mortality outcomes we analysed the results with random-effects model meta-analysis, and for other outcomes we did a qualitative synthesis as meta-analysis was not feasible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials, 14 of which had available outcome data (182,880 participants). Nine trials provided data on total mortality (155,899 participants, 11,940 deaths), median follow-up time nine years, giving a risk ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.03). Eight trials provided data on cardiovascular mortality (152,435 participants, 4567 deaths), risk ratio 1.03 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.17) and eight trials on cancer mortality (139,290 participants, 3663 deaths), risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.12). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter these findings.We did not find an effect on clinical events or other measures of morbidity but one trial found an increased occurrence of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia with screening and one trial found an increased occurence of self-reported chronic disease. One trial found a 20% increase in the total number of new diagnoses per participant over six years compared to the control group. No trials compared the total number of prescriptions, but two out of four trials found an increased number of people using antihypertensive drugs. Two out of four trials found small beneficial effects on self-reported health, but this could be due to reporting bias as the trials were not blinded. We did not find an effect on admission to hospital, disability, worry, additional visits to the physician, or absence from work, but most of these outcomes were poorly studied. We did not find useful results on the number of referrals to specialists, the number of follow-up tests after positive screening results, or the amount of surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

General health checks did not reduce morbidity or mortality, neither overall nor for cardiovascular or cancer causes, although the number of new diagnoses was increased. Important harmful outcomes, such as the number of follow-up diagnostic procedures or short term psychological effects, were often not studied or reported and many trials had methodological problems. With the large number of participants and deaths included, the long follow-up periods used, and considering that cardiovascular and cancer mortality were not reduced, general health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.

The role of physician reminders in faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening in the form of faecal occult blood (FOB) testing can significantly reduce the burden of this disease and has been used as early as the 1970s. Effective involvement of GPs along with reminding physicians prior to seeing a patient may improve uptake.

OBJECTIVE

This article is a systematic review of published literature examining the uptake of FOB testing after physician reminders as part of the colorectal cancer screening process.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from January 1975 to October 2010. All studies comparing physician reminders (Rem) with controls (NRem) were identified. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain a summary outcome.

RESULTS

Five comparative studies involving 25 287 patients were analyzed. There were 12 641 patients were in the Rem and 12 646 in the NRem group. All five studies obtained a higher percentage uptake when physician reminders were given. However, in only two of the studies were the percentage uptake significantly higher. There was significant heterogeneity among trials (I2 = 95%). The combined increase in FOB test uptake was not statistically significant (random effects model: risk difference = 6.6%, 95% CI: -2-14.7%; z = 1.59, P = 0.112).

CONCLUSION

Reminding physicians about those patients due for FOB testing may not improve the effectiveness of a colorectal cancer screening programme. Further studies are required and should focus on areas where there is a lower baseline uptake and areas with high levels of deprivation.

Computerized clinical decision support systems for primary preventive care: a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review of effects on process of care and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) are claimed to improve processes and outcomes of primary preventive care (PPC), but their effects, safety, and acceptance must be confirmed. We updated our previous systematic reviews of CCDSSs and integrated a knowledge translation approach in the process. The objective was to review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of CCDSSs for PPC on process of care, patient outcomes, harms, and costs.

METHODS

We conducted a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid's EBM Reviews Database, Inspec, and other databases, as well as reference lists through January 2010. We contacted authors to confirm data or provide additional information. We included RCTs that assessed the effect of a CCDSS for PPC on process of care and patient outcomes compared to care provided without a CCDSS. A study was considered to have a positive effect (i.e., CCDSS showed improvement) if at least 50% of the relevant study outcomes were statistically significantly positive.

RESULTS

We added 17 new RCTs to our 2005 review for a total of 41 studies. RCT quality improved over time. CCDSSs improved process of care in 25 of 40 (63%) RCTs. Cumulative scientifically strong evidence supports the effectiveness of CCDSSs for screening and management of dyslipidaemia in primary care. There is mixed evidence for effectiveness in screening for cancer and mental health conditions, multiple preventive care activities, vaccination, and other preventive care interventions. Fourteen (34%) trials assessed patient outcomes, and four (29%) reported improvements with the CCDSS. Most trials were not powered to evaluate patient-important outcomes. CCDSS costs and adverse events were reported in only six (15%) and two (5%) trials, respectively. Information on study duration was often missing, limiting our ability to assess sustainability of CCDSS effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the effectiveness of CCDSSs for screening and treatment of dyslipidaemia in primary care with less consistent evidence for CCDSSs used in screening for cancer and mental health-related conditions, vaccinations, and other preventive care. CCDSS effects on patient outcomes, safety, costs of care, and provider satisfaction remain poorly supported.

A web-based patient activation intervention to improve hypertension care: study design and baseline characteristics in the web hypertension study

BACKGROUND

Despite the known health risks of hypertension, many hypertensive patients still have uncontrolled blood pressure. Clinical inertia, the tendency of physicians not to intensify treatment, is a common barrier in controlling chronic diseases. This trial is aimed at determining the impact of activating patients to ask providers to make changes to their care through tailored feedback.

METHODS

Diagnosed hypertensive patients were enrolled in this RCT and randomized to one of two study groups: (1) the intervention condition--Web-based hypertension feedback, based on the individual patient's self-report of health variables and previous BP measurements, to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about hypertension care (2) the control condition--Web-based preventive health feedback, based on the individual's self-report of receiving preventive care (e.g., pap testing), to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about preventive care. The primary outcome of the study is change in blood pressure and change in the percentage of patients in each group with controlled blood pressure.

CONCLUSION

Five hundred participants were enrolled and baseline characteristics include a mean age of 60.0 years; 57.6% female; and 77.6% white. Overall 37.7% participants had uncontrolled blood pressure; the mean body mass index (BMI) was in the obese range (32.4) and 21.8% had diabetes. By activating patients to become involved in their own care, we believe the addition of the web-based intervention will improve blood pressure control compared to a control group who receive web-based preventive messages unrelated to hypertension.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

Although the evidence to support influenza vaccination is poor, it is promoted by many health authorities. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates in those 60 years or older.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates in those 60 or older.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2010, issue 3), containing the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (January 1950 to July 2010), PubMed (January 1950 to July 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010 Week 28), AgeLine (1978 to July 2010), ERIC (1965 to July 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to July 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to increase influenza vaccination rates in those aged 60 years and older, recording influenza vaccination status either through clinic records, billing data or local/national vaccination registers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four RCTs were included. All included RCTs studied seniors in the community and in high-income countries. No RCTs of society-level interventions were included. Heterogeneity was marked and meta-analysis was limited. Only five RCTs were graded at low and six at moderate risk of bias. They included three of 13 personalized postcard interventions (all three with the 95% confidence interval (CI) above unity), two of the four home visit interventions (both with 95% CI above unity, but one a small study), three of the four reminder to physicians interventions (none with 95% CI above unity) and three of the four facilitator interventions (one with 95% CI above unity, and one P < 0.01). The other 33 RCTs were at high risk of bias and no recommendations for practice can be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Personalized postcards or phone calls are effective, and home visits, and facilitators, may be effective. Reminders to physicians are not. There is insufficient good evidence for other interventions.

Healthy colon, healthy life: a novel colorectal cancer screening intervention

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are increasing, but they are still low, particularly in ethnic minority groups. In many resource-poor settings, fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is the main screening option.

INTERVENTION

Culturally tailored telephone counseling by community health advisors employed by a community-based organization, culturally tailored brochures, and customized FOBT kits.

DESIGN

RCT. Participants were randomized to (1) basic intervention: culturally tailored brochure plus FOBT kit (n=765); (2) enhanced intervention: brochure, FOBT plus telephone counseling (n=768); or (3) usual care (n=256).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Latino and Vietnamese primary care patients at a large public hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-reported receipt of FOBT or any CRC screening at 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

1358 individuals (718 Latinos and 640 Vietnamese) completed the follow-up survey. Self-reported FOBT screening rates increased by 7.8% in the control group, by 15.1% in the brochure group, and by 25.1% in the brochure/telephone counseling group (p<0.01 for differences between each intervention and usual care and for the difference between brochure/telephone counseling and brochure alone). For any CRC screening, rates increased by 4.1% in the usual care group, by 11.9% in the FOBT/brochure group, and by 21.4% in the brochure/telephone counseling group (p<0.01 for differences between each intervention and usual care and for the difference between the basic and the enhanced intervention).

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention that included culturally tailored brochures and tailored telephone counseling increased CRC screening in Latinos and the Vietnamese. Brochure and telephone counseling together had the greatest impact. Future research should address replication and dissemination of this model for Latinos and Vietnamese in other communities, and adaptation of the model for other groups.

Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Programs to promote colorectal cancer screening are common, yet information regarding the cost-effectiveness of such efforts is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to increase rates of colorectal cancer screening.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized, controlled trial. The intervention involved 21,860 patients aged 50 to 80 years across 11 health centers overdue for colorectal cancer screening. Patients were randomized to receive a mailing that included a tailored letter, educational brochure, and fecal occult blood test kit at baseline and 6 months follow-up.

MEASURES

We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness of these mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening by fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy using internal cost estimates of labor and supplies.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer screening rates were higher for patients in the intervention compared with control patients (44% vs. 38%, P < 0.001). The total cost of the intervention was approximately $5.48 per patient, resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $94 per additional patient screened. This estimate ranged from $69 to $156, based on assumptions of the cost of the intervention components, magnitude of intervention effect, age range, and size of the targeted patient population.

CONCLUSION

Tailored patient mailings are a cost-effective approach to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening.

Intervention to increase recommendation and delivery of screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by healthcare providers a systematic review of provider reminders

Most major medical organizations recommend routine screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Screening can lead to early detection of these cancers, resulting in reduced mortality. Yet, not all people who should be screened are screened regularly or, in some cases, ever. This report presents results of systematic reviews of effectiveness, applicability, economic efficiency, barriers to implementation, and other harms or benefits of provider reminder/recall interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. These interventions involve using systems to inform healthcare providers when individual clients are due (reminder) or overdue (recall) for specific cancer screening tests. Evidence in this review of studies published from 1986 through 2004 indicates that reminder/recall systems can effectively increase screening with mammography, Pap, fecal occult blood tests, and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Additional research is needed to determine if provider reminder/recall systems are effective in increasing colorectal cancer screening by colonoscopy. Specific areas for further research are also suggested.

Patient and physician reminders to promote colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Screening reduces colorectal cancer mortality, but effective screening tests remain underused. Systematic reminders to patients and physicians could increase screening rates

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of patient and physician reminders in 11 ambulatory health care centers. Participants included 21 860 patients aged 50 to 80 years who were overdue for colorectal cancer screening and 110 primary care physicians. Patients were randomly assigned to receive mailings containing an educational pamphlet, fecal occult blood test kit, and instructions for direct scheduling of flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. Physicians were randomly assigned to receive electronic reminders during office visits with patients overdue for screening. The primary outcome was receipt of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy over 15 months, and the secondary outcome was detection of colorectal adenomas.

RESULTS

Screening rates were higher for patients who received mailings compared with those who did not (44.0% vs 38.1%; P < .001). The effect increased with age: +3.7% for ages 50 to 59 years; +7.3% for ages 60 to 69 years; and +10.1% for ages 70 to 80 years (P = .01 for trend). Screening rates were similar among patients of physicians receiving electronic reminders and the control group (41.9% vs 40.2%; P = .47). However, electronic reminders tended to increase screening rates among patients with 3 or more primary care visits (59.5% vs 52.7%; P = .07). Detection of adenomas tended to increase with patient mailings (5.7% vs 5.2%; P = .10) and physician reminders (6.0% vs 4.9%; P = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

Mailed reminders to patients are an effective tool to promote colorectal cancer screening, and electronic reminders to physicians may increase screening among adults who have more frequent primary care visits.

Client-directed interventions to increase community demand for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening a systematic review

Most major medical organizations recommend routine screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Screening can lead to early detection of these cancers, resulting in reduced mortality. Yet not all people who should be screened are screened, either regularly or, in some cases, ever. This report presents the results of systematic reviews of effectiveness, applicability, economic efficiency, barriers to implementation, and other harms or benefits of interventions designed to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by increasing community demand for these services. Evidence from these reviews indicates that screening for breast cancer (mammography) and cervical cancer (Pap test) has been effectively increased by use of client reminders, small media, and one-on-one education. Screening for colorectal cancer by fecal occult blood test has been increased effectively by use of client reminders and small media. Additional research is needed to determine whether client incentives, group education, and mass media are effective in increasing use of any of the three screening tests; whether one-on-one education increases screening for colorectal cancer; and whether any demand-enhancing interventions are effective in increasing the use of other colorectal cancer screening procedures (i.e., flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, double contrast barium enema). Specific areas for further research are also suggested in this report.

Process evaluation in an intervention designed to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening in a VA medical center

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the United States. Although CRC screening is recommended for individuals 50 years and older, screening completion rates are low. This can be attributed to provider and patient barriers. We developed an intervention to improve provider recommendation and patient screening among noncompliant male veterans in a 2-year randomized controlled trial and examined the relationship between participation and study outcomes among patients and providers. Overall, providers who attended intervention sessions recommended CRC screening during 64% of patient visits and providers who did not attend any intervention sessions recommended screening during 54% of visits (p < .01). Patients of providers who attended intervention sessions also were more likely to be screened (42% versus 29%, p < .05). The patient intervention did not have the desired impact. The subgroup of patients in the patient intervention was not more likely to complete CRC screening.

WITHDRAWN: Interventions to implement prevention in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians hold a strategic position in delivering preventive services. However discrepancies exist between evidence based guidelines and practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register (November 1995; August 1999), MEDLINE (1980 to 1995) and hand searched relevant journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses of interventions to improve preventive services by primary care professionals responsible for patient care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included, involving more than 2000 health professionals and 99,000 people, with 83 comparisons between intervention and control groups. Post intervention differences between intervention and control groups varied widely within and across categories of interventions. Most interventions were found to be effective in some studies, but not in others. Five comparisons of group education versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -4% and +31%. Nine comparisons of physician reminders versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between 5% and 24%. Fourteen comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -3% and +64%. Six comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus group education reported absolute changes varying between -31% and +28%. All these comparisons used randomised groups. Ten comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention used non-randomised groups and showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -5% and +21%. The remaining planned comparisons within categories of interventions contained less than five comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no solid basis for assuming that a particular intervention or package of interventions will work. Effective interventions to increase preventive activities in primary care exist, but there is considerable variation in the level of change achieved, with effect sizes usually small or moderate. Tailoring interventions to address specific barriers to change in a particular setting is probably important. Multifaceted interventions may be more effective than single interventions, because more barriers to change can be addressed. Future research should analyse barriers to change and interventions to implement preventive services in more detail, to clarify how interventions relate to specific barriers. Since more complex interventions are likely to be more effective but also more costly, economic evaluations should also be included.

Tobacco control interventions in the emergency department: a joint statement of emergency medicine organizations

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death and illness in the United States. National practice guidelines call for all health care providers to "ask" all patients about tobacco use, and to "advise, assess, assist, arrange" when smokers want to quit smoking (the "5 As"). Emergency departments (EDs) have not been an important locus of tobacco control efforts, although ED patients typically smoke at rates exceeding that of the general population, are interested in quitting, and often have limited access to primary care. To address the role of emergency medicine in tobacco control, the American College of Emergency Physicians convened a task force of representatives of major emergency medicine professional organizations. Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the group met in 2004 and 2005. This article represents a summary of the task force's recommendations for tobacco control practice, training, and research. We call on emergency care providers to routinely assess patients' smoking status, offer brief advice to quit, and refer patients to the national smokers' Quitline (800-QUIT-NOW) or a locally available program. Given the global burden of tobacco-related illness, the task force considers it essential for emergency physicians to conduct research into the efficacy of ED-based interventions and to place tobacco control into the training curriculum for emergency medicine residencies. Tobacco control fits within the traditions of other ED-based public health practices, such as injury control. ED-based tobacco control would allow the specialty to help fulfill the Healthy People 2010 mandate to reduce the prevalence of smoking among US citizens.

Tobacco Control Interventions in the Emergency Department: A Joint Statement of Emergency Medicine Organizations

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death and illness in the United States. National practice guidelines call for all health care providers to "ask" all patients about tobacco use, and to "advise, assess, assist, arrange" when smokers want to quit smoking (the "5 As"). Emergency departments (EDs) have not been an important locus of tobacco control efforts, although ED patients typically smoke at rates exceeding that of the general population, are interested in quitting, and often have limited access to primary care. To address the role of emergency medicine in tobacco control, the American College of Emergency Physicians convened a task force of representatives of major emergency medicine professional organizations. Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the group met in 2004 and 2005. This article represents a summary of the task force's recommendations for tobacco control practice, training, and research. We call on emergency care providers to routinely assess patients' smoking status, offer brief advice to quit, and refer patients to the national smokers' Quitline (800-QUIT-NOW) or a locally available program. Given the global burden of tobacco-related illness, the task force considers it essential for emergency physicians to conduct research into the efficacy of ED-based interventions and to place tobacco control into the training curriculum for emergency medicine residencies. Tobacco control fits within the traditions of other ED-based public health practices, such as injury control. ED-based tobacco control would allow the specialty to help fulfill the Healthy People 2010 mandate to reduce the prevalence of smoking among US citizens.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-critically ill patients: less may be more

Significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding resulting from stress ulceration is a serious life-threatening complication. However, it occurs relatively rarely even in the sickest patients. Therefore, guidelines suggest that prophylaxis (e.g., with acid-suppressive therapy) should be reserved for highly selected patients. Despite these recommendations, numerous studies suggest that many hospitalized patients are inappropriately placed on acid-suppressive therapy (AST) for the sole purpose of preventing stress ulceration. Moreover, it appears that once AST is started, medications are continued even after discharge, resulting in further unnecessary expenditure of resources. National and local efforts are needed to curtail this practice that places patients at risk for drug side effects while affording them little or no benefit.

Improving health care quality for racial/ethnic minorities: a systematic review of the best evidence regarding provider and organization interventions

BACKGROUND

Despite awareness of inequities in health care quality, little is known about strategies that could improve the quality of healthcare for ethnic minority populations. We conducted a systematic literature review and analysis to synthesize the findings of controlled studies evaluating interventions targeted at health care providers to improve health care quality or reduce disparities in care for racial/ethnic minorities.

METHODS

We performed electronic and hand searches from 1980 through June 2003 to identify randomized controlled trials or concurrent controlled trials. Reviewers abstracted data from studies to determine study characteristics, results, and quality. We graded the strength of the evidence as excellent, good, fair or poor using predetermined criteria. The main outcome measures were evidence of effectiveness and cost of strategies to improve health care quality or reduce disparities in care for racial/ethnic minorities.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies met criteria for review. Almost all (n = 26) took place in the primary care setting, and most (n = 19) focused on improving provision of preventive services. Only two studies were designed specifically to meet the needs of racial/ethnic minority patients. All 10 studies that used a provider reminder system for provision of standardized services (mostly preventive) reported favorable outcomes. The following quality improvement strategies demonstrated favorable results but were used in a small number of studies: bypassing the physician to offer preventive services directly to patients (2 of 2 studies favorable), provider education alone (2 of 2 studies favorable), use of a structured questionnaire to assess adolescent health behaviors (1 of 1 study favorable), and use of remote simultaneous translation (1 of 1 study favorable). Interventions employing more than one main strategy were used in 9 studies with inconsistent results. There were limited data on the costs of these strategies, as only one study reported cost data.

CONCLUSION

There are several promising strategies that may improve health care quality for racial/ethnic minorities, but a lack of studies specifically targeting disease areas and processes of care for which disparities have been previously documented. Further research and funding is needed to evaluate strategies designed to reduce disparities in health care quality for racial/ethnic minorities.

A trial of education, prompts, and opinion leaders to improve prescription of lipid modifying therapy by primary care physicians for patients with ischemic heart disease

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials indicate that treatment with lipid modifying therapy improves outcomes in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) and low levels of high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. The results of these trials, however, have not been widely implemented in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To develop and test an intervention designed to increase the rate of prescription of lipid modifying therapy and to determine the relative effectiveness of three different prompts (progress notes, patient letters, or computer chart reminders).

METHODS

The study was conducted in 11 US Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. The effect of the intervention on the proportion of eligible patients receiving lipid modifying therapy was compared between five intervention sites and six matched control sites using a controlled before and after study design. Additionally, 92 providers within the intervention clinics were randomized to receive one of the three prompts. Data were analyzed using logistic regression modeling which incorporated terms to account for the clustered nature of the data.

RESULTS

At the intervention sites the prescription rate increased from 8.3% during the pre-intervention period to 39.1% during the intervention (OR = 6.5, 95% CI 5.2 to 8.2, p<0.0001) but remained unchanged at the control sites. The interaction between group (control v intervention) and time period was highly significant (p<0.0001). The adjusted odds of receiving a prescription during the intervention period was 3.1 times higher at the intervention sites than at the control sites (95% CI 2.1 to 4.7). Overall, there was no significant difference in prescription rates among the three prompt groups. However, there was a significant interaction between prompt group and site, indicating that the efficacy of the prompts differed by site.

CONCLUSION

An intervention for primary care providers consisting of an educational workshop, opinion leader influence, and prompts substantially increased the prescription rate of lipid modifying therapy.

Promoting use of colorectal cancer screening tests. Can we change physician behavior?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underutilized despite evidence that screening reduces mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of an intervention targeting physicians and their patients on rates of CRC screening.

DESIGN

A randomized clinical trial of community physicians and their patients.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-four community primary care physicians randomly assigned to an intervention consisting of academic detailing and direct mailings to patients or a control group. Patients aged 50 to 79 years in the intervention group physicians received a letter from their physician, a brochure on CRC screening, and a packet of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) cards.

MEASUREMENTS

After 1 year we measured receipt of the following: (1) FOBT in the past 2 years, (2) flexible sigmoidoscopy (SIG) or colonoscopy (COL) in the previous 5 years, and (3) any CRC screening. We report the percent change from baseline in both groups.

RESULTS

9,652 patients were enrolled for 2 years, and 3,732 patients were enrolled for 5 years. There was no increase in any CRC screening that occurred in the intervention group for patients enrolled for 2 years (12.7 increase vs 12.5%, P=.51). Similar results were seen for any CRC screening among patients enrolled for 5 years (9.7% increase vs 8.6%, P=.45). The only outcome on which the intervention had an effect was on patient rates of screening SIG (7.4% increase vs 4.4%, P<.01).

CONCLUSION

With the exception of an increase in rates of SIG in the intervention group, the intervention had no effect on rates of CRC screening. Future interventions should assess innovative approaches to increase rates of CRC screening.

Patients and computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in family practice. Randomized-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In New Zealand, more than 5% of people aged 50 years and older have undiagnosed diabetes; most of them attend family practitioners (FPs) at least once a year.

OBJECTIVES

To test the effectiveness of patients or computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in patients attending FPs.

DESIGN

A randomized-controlled trial compared screening rates in 4 intervention arms: patient reminders, computer reminders, both reminders, and usual care. The trial lasted 2 months. The patient reminder was a diabetes risk self-assessment sheet filled in by patients and given to the FP during the consultation. The computer reminder was an icon that flashed only for patients considered eligible for screening.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and seven FPs.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was whether each eligible patient, who attended during the trial, was or was not tested for blood glucose. Analysis was by intention to treat and allowed for clustering by FP.

RESULTS

Patient reminders (odds ratio [OR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21, 2.43), computer reminders (OR 2.55, 1.68, 3.88), and both reminders (OR 1.69, 1.11, 2.59) were all effective compared with usual care. Computer reminders were more effective than patient reminders (OR 1.49, 1.07, 2.07). Patients were more likely to be screened if they visited the FP repeatedly, if patients were non-European, if they were "regular" patients of the practice, and if their FP had a higher screening rate prior to the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and computer reminders were effective methods to increase screening for diabetes. However, the effects were not additive.

Interventions fail to increase cancer screening rates in community-based primary care practices

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening in primary care offices is reaching only a modest percentage of adults 50 years and older. The objectives of this study were to determine if screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer could be significantly increased by two simple office interventions in community-based primary care offices and then maintained over 3 years.

METHODS

Twenty-two community-based primary care practices were divided randomly into four arms: control, practice-based intervention, patient-based intervention, and both interventions combined. At baseline and annually for 3 years, medical records from approximately 100 male and 100 female patients 50 years and older were randomly selected. The outcome measures were screening rates for mammogram, Pap smear, fecal occult blood test, and flexible sigmoidoscopy or other colonic imaging.

RESULTS

Generally each study arm evidenced a significant 1-year increase in screening rates, followed by an overall decline to approximate baseline levels. The first year increases in screening were not related to either invention, alone or in combination.

CONCLUSIONS

These interventions do not have a significant impact on cancer screening rates in adults over several years. A variety of possible variables may have affected the long-term outcomes.

A randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers

BACKGROUND

We assessed the efficacy of the Cancer Screening Office Systems (Cancer SOS), an intervention designed to increase cancer screening in primary care settings serving disadvantaged populations.

METHODS

Eight primary care clinics participating in a county-funded health insurance plan in Hillsborough County, Fla, agreed to take part in a cluster-randomized experimental trial. The Cancer SOS had 2 components: a cancer-screening checklist with chart stickers that indicated whether specific cancer-screening tests were due, ordered, or completed; and a division of office responsibilities to achieve high screening rates. Established patients were eligible if they were between the ages of 50 and 75 years and had no contraindication for screening. Data abstracted from charts of independent samples collected at baseline (n = 1,196) and at a 12-month follow-up (n = 1,237) was used to assess whether the patient was up-to-date on one or more of the following cancer-screening tests: mammogram, Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT).

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis that controlled for baseline screening rates, secular trends, and other patient and clinic characteristics, the intervention increased the odds of mammograms (odds ratio [OR] = 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-9.78, P = .023) and fecal occult blood tests (OR = 2.5, 95% CI, 1.65-4.0, P <.0001) with a trend toward greater use of Pap smears (OR = 1.57, 95% CI, 0.92-2.64, P = .096).

CONCLUSIONS

The Cancer SOS intervention significantly increased rates of cancer screening among primary care clinics serving disadvantaged populations. The Cancer SOS intervention is one option for providers or policy makers who wish to address cancer related health disparities.

Primary care provider perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in a managed care setting

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests (e.g., fecal occult blood testing [FOBT], flexible sigmoidoscopy [FS], etc.) are underused. Primary care providers (PCPs) play a critical role in screening, but barriers to and facilitators of screening as perceived by PCPs in managed care settings are poorly understood. The objectives of the current study were to describe current CRC screening practices and to explore determinants of test use by PCPs in a managed care setting.

METHODS

In 2000, a self-administered survey was mailed to a stratified, random sample of 1340 PCPs in a large, network model health maintenance organization in California.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 67%. PCPs indicated that 79% of their standard-risk patients were screened for CRC. PCP-reported median rates of recommendation for the use of specific screening tests were 90% for FOBT and 70% for FS. In logistic regression models, perceived barriers to the use of FOBT and FS included patient characteristics (e.g., education) and PCP-related barriers (e.g., failure to recall that patients were due for testing). Perceived facilitators of the use of FOBT and FS included interventions targeting certain aspects of the health care system (e.g., reimbursement) and interventions targeting certain aspects of the tests themselves (e.g., provision of evidence of a test's effectiveness). Assignment of high priority to screening, integrated medical group (as opposed to independent practice association) affiliation, and the proportion of patients receiving routine health maintenance examinations were positively associated with reported test use.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC screening tests appear to be underused in the managed care setting examined in the current study. The perceived barriers and facilitators that were identified can be used to guide interventions aimed at increasing recommendations for, as well as actual performance of, CRC screening.

Patient characteristics as predictors of primary health care preferences: a systematic literature analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify associations between various cultural and demographic factors and patients' primary health care preferences.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches were performed in MEDLINE (1966-December 2000), PsycINFO (1977-May 2001) and Sociological Abstracts (1963-December 2000). Identified papers were checked for more papers.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies with a focus on primary health care or health care in general, asking patients about preferences with regard to health care, reporting quantitative results and examining the relations between specific patient characteristics and patient preferences.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted from studies using a scoring form to register what methods were used, which patient characteristics were analysed and which patient characteristics significantly influenced patients' preferences with regard to different aspects of health care (P < 0.05).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 145 studies were included with 2276 comparisons between subgroups of patients. Of all the comparisons, 607 (27%) showed a significant association between patient characteristics and preferences with regard to primary health care. Age and economic status significantly related to patient preferences in 38 and 33% of the comparisons, respectively. Education, health status, family situation, sex, and utilization of health care related significantly to patient preferences in less than 25% of the comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

This review of the literature showed patient characteristics to be an important determinant of preferences regarding many aspects of primary health care defined as general practice care or health care, in general. All of the patient characteristics examined here showed at least some significant associations with preferences for primary health care.

Strategies for the implementation of cervical and breast cancer screening of women by primary care physicians

OBJECTIVE

While effective screening tests for the prevention and early detection of cervical and breast cancers exist, poor screening rates are evident. The aim of this paper was to determine the most effective strategies for the implementation of breast and cervical cancer screening delivered to women.

METHODS

An in-depth search of the literature using Medline and the Cochrane Library was carried out between the years 1966 and 2000. Randomized controlled studies addressing the delivery of both breast and cervical screening were retained for the purposes of this review. Absolute difference (AD) in screening was defined as screening rates in the intervention arm--screening rates in the control arm. Number needed to intervene (NNI) is a new term developed for the purpose of this paper and refers to the number of physicians or physician-patient pairs that must be exposed to the intervention before one screening test is performed. NNI is defined as 1/AD.

RESULTS

Strategies for the implementation of screening tests are divided into three categories: physician-only based, physician and patient based, and patient-only based.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician-based strategies, especially manual and computer-generated reminders, appear to be the most effective approach in the implementation of breast and cervical cancer delivery to women. Absolute gains in screening rates were as high as 40% with an NNI of 2.5 physicians; therefore, approximately 3 physicians need to be exposed to a reminder notice before 1 physician actually orders the screening tests.

Evaluating the Effect of a Preventive Exam Reminder Letter Sent to Employees at an Oil Company

The purpose of this article is to describe how a worksite periodic health examination evolved into a program with greater emphasis on employee responsibility and accountability; to determine the effectiveness of a worksite preventive exam reminder letter program; and to gauge whether the letter encouraged employees to make an appointment with their physicians for a preventive exam. Approximately 25% of the employees who received the letter made an appointment with their physicians. Approximately 16% of the employees who had preventive exams learned something about their health of which they were previously unaware. The preventive exam reminder program is an effective method to encourage and remind employees to see their physicians for preventive exams. In future years, the method of delivering the reminder letter may change to one that is less time consuming and labor intensive and uses technology to deliver messages more cost-effectively.

Improved cholesterol management in coronary heart disease patients enrolled in an HMO

The purpose of the study was to describe the effect of physician reminders on the measurement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and treatment to achieve an LDL-C goal of < or = 100 mg/dL in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. After reminders were initiated, the number of CHD patients without a documented LDL-C was reduced from 30% to 18%, between January 1997 and July 1998, and the percentage of CHD patients achieving the LDL-C goal improved from 10% to 27%. Thus, reminders can be an effective tool in improving cholesterol management of CHD patients. In contrast, a cholesterol-lowering clinic made available to some physicians, in addition to the reminders, was rarely used.

Interventions to implement prevention in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians hold a strategic position in delivering preventive services. However discrepancies exist between evidence based guidelines and practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register (November 1995; August 1999), MEDLINE (1980 to 1995) and hand searched relevant journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses of interventions to improve preventive services by primary care professionals responsible for patient care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included, involving more than 2000 health professionals and 99,000 people, with 83 comparisons between intervention and control groups. Post intervention differences between intervention and control groups varied widely within and across categories of interventions. Most interventions were found to be effective in some studies, but not in others. Five comparisons of group education versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -4% and +31%. Nine comparisons of physician reminders versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between 5% and 24%. Fourteen comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -3% and +64%. Six comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus group education reported absolute changes varying between -31% and +28%. All these comparisons used randomised groups. Ten comparisons of multifaceted interventions versus no intervention used non-randomised groups and showed absolute change of preventive services varying between -5% and +21%. The remaining planned comparisons within categories of interventions contained less than five comparisons.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no solid basis for assuming that a particular intervention or package of interventions will work. Effective interventions to increase preventive activities in primary care exist, but there is considerable variation in the level of change achieved, with effect sizes usually small or moderate. Tailoring interventions to address specific barriers to change in a particular setting is probably important. Multifaceted interventions may be more effective than single interventions, because more barriers to change can be addressed. Future research should analyse barriers to change and interventions to implement preventive services in more detail, to clarify how interventions relate to specific barriers. Since more complex interventions are likely to be more effective but also more costly, economic evaluations should also be included.

Breast cancer screening for older women in a primary care practice

OBJECTIVE

To determine rates of breast cancer screening for older women cared for in a primary care practice and to identify associations between patient and physician characteristics and breast cancer screening.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of older women.

SETTING

An urban hospital-based academic general medicine practice. This practice uses a computerized medical record and office procedures that facilitate tracking and ordering of mammograms.

PARTICIPANTS

A random sample of 130 women aged 65 to 80 who receive primary care at a hospital-based general medicine practice.

MEASUREMENTS

Data were collected from the hospital's computerized medical record. We recorded all clinical breast exams and mammograms performed or recommended during the 2-year study period.

RESULTS

The median age of the 130 women studied was 71, and 21% of the women were black. Most patients had no serious comorbid illness (69%) and were independent in their activities of daily living (92%). During the 2-year study period, mammography was recommended for 95% of women and completed for 84%, and clinical breast exam was performed on 75%. Patients of male physicians had higher rates of mammography than patients of female physicians (89% vs. 75%, P = .045). Patients of faculty physicians had higher rates of clinical breast exam than patients of house officers or fellows (83% vs. 56%, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

We report a very high rate of mammography for women cared for at a hospital-based primary care practice. The systems in place to facilitate ordering and tracking of mammograms probably contributed to the unusually high rate of mammography observed.

Computer-based ambulatory information systems: recent developments

This article updates the author's earlier review of some of the major computer-based ambulatory information systems and the literature evaluating their costs, benefits, effect on quality of care, and physician acceptance. The evidence suggests that computer-based information systems can increase access to clinical information, improve physician performance, enhance quality of care, and facilitate outcomes research review. In addition to presenting health information networks and clinical decision support systems such as reminder systems, drug ordering systems, and medical care management systems, the article describes applications of telemedicine and Web-based systems. It also discusses barriers to the widespread use of computer-based ambulatory information systems.

Locating a health advocate in a private obstetrics/gynecology office increases patient's receipt of preventive recommendations

This study was performed to determine if adding a health advocate (HA) to the care team for postmenopausal women increased the number of women for whom the physician recommended screening tests or prevention strategies: cholesterol level, mammography, depression counseling, smoking cessation, or weight reduction. The study took place in two locations of a private obstetrician-gynecologist practice. In one location, an HA reviewed screening forms and counseled women about preventive services recommended by the physician. In the second location, women completed the screening form, but treatment occurred as usual. Women were eligible if they were postmenopausal or age 50 or over and were being seen for preventive care. A total of 210 postmenopausal women were screened. Women who were screened when the HA was present (n = 85) did not differ from women screened at the intervention location when the HA was not present (n = 68) or screened at a second practice location (n = 57) in the prevalence of risk factors. Women were significantly more likely to receive indicated preventive recommendations when the HA was present (24% versus 73%, p < 0.001). For breast cancer screening, nearly all women screened when the HA was present received a referral compared to about one third of women screened when the HA was not present (OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.8-5.2). Women are more likely to receive recommendations based on screening data when ancillary staff are available to assist in patient education and referral and to encourage physician recommendations. Further work is needed to identify cost-effective methods for supporting physicians' preventive care efforts.

Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents, and adults. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services

This paper presents the results of systematic reviews of the effectiveness, applicability, other effects, economic impact, and barriers to use of selected population-based interventions intended to improve vaccination coverage. The related systematic reviews are linked by a common conceptual approach. These reviews form the basis for recommendations by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force) regarding the use of these selected interventions. The Task Force recommendations are presented on pp. 92-96 of this issue.

Educational content and the effectiveness of influenza vaccination reminders

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a mailed patient education brochure (addressing demonstrated reasons for vaccination refusal) would result in a higher rate of influenza vaccination than a mailed postcard reminder without educational content.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING

Urban, predominantly African-American, low-income community.

PARTICIPANTS

There were 740 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 years and older in the study.

MEASUREMENTS

Receipt of influenza vaccination and beliefs about influenza and influenza vaccination were measured by telephone survey self-report.

MAIN RESULTS

We successfully contacted 202 individuals (69.9%) who received the postcard reminder and 229 individuals (71.1%) who received the educational brochure. People receiving the educational brochure were more likely to report influenza vaccination during the previous vaccination season than those who received the postcard reminder (66.4% vs 56.9%, p =.04). They also reported more interest in influenza vaccination in the coming year. (66.5% vs 57.1%, p =.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A mailed educational brochure is more effective than a simple reminder in increasing influenza vaccination rates among inner-city, elderly patients.

Interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care

OBJECTIVES

This review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of different interventions to improve the delivery of preventive services in primary care.

METHODS

MEDLINE searches and manual searches of 21 scientific journals and the Cochrane Effective Professional and Organization of Care of trials were used to identify relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies were included if they focused on interventions designed to improve preventive activities by primary care clinicians. Two researchers independently assessed the quality of the studies and extracted data for use in constructing descriptive overviews.

RESULTS

The 58 studies included comprised 86 comparisons between intervention and control groups. Postintervention differences between intervention and control groups varied widely within and across categories of interventions. Most interventions were found to be effective in some studies, but not effective in other studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective interventions to increase preventive activities in primary care are available. Detailed studies are needed to identify factors that influence the effectiveness of different interventions.

Implementing preventive services: to what extent can we change provider performance in ambulatory care? A review of the screening, immunization, and counseling literature

Strategies to improve the delivery of preventive care often consist of office-based interventions, which are designed to modify provider behaviors or practice patterns. We report on a meta-analysis of 117 behavioral outcomes extracted from 43 studies. Meta-analytic techniques were used to express the results in a common metric, which allowed quantitative comparisons across outcomes. Studies were examined by domains of preventive care (screening, immunization, and counseling) and divided into two groups based on unit of analysis (provider or patient categories). The mean effect size reflects the difference in proportion of physicians providing the targeted behavior between the experimental and comparison groups. In the provider category, the weighted mean effect size for screening was .14, for immunization was .18, and for counseling was .28. In the patient category, the weighted means for screening and immunization were .12 and .15, respectively, but were smaller for the counseling (.08). Because tests for homogeneity of effect sizes were rejected in the patient category, caution in interpreting mean effect sizes is warranted because of variability across individual values. In summary, office-based interventions were found to have positive effects on providers' adherence to preventive recommendations. We discuss the methodological issues and needs for future work to enhance the delivery of preventive services.

How reminders given to patients and physicians affected pap smear use in a health maintenance organization: results of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite its effectiveness as a method of controlling cervical carcinoma, the use of Pap smear testing remains incomplete, and its promotion in the primary care setting provides an important opportunity for intervention.

METHODS

The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial that involved three sites of a health maintenance organization (HMO) serving an urban minority population. Their aim was to evaluate the impact of reminders given to patients and physicians on site visitation by patients and Pap smear use. Eligible women (n=5801) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 intervention combinations (in which reminders were given to either the patient or the physician, to both, or to neither). If they were ineligible for patient reminder intervention, patients were randomized only to physician reminder intervention (the presence or absence of it). The letter of reminder mailed to the patient invited women due for Pap smears to visit the HMO site, and the reminder for physicians was a medical record notice that a Pap smear was due. Logistic and survival analyses were used to investigate the correlation of intervention status with visitation, interval of time to a visit, and Pap smear use.

RESULTS

In the primary intent-to-treat analysis, there was no significant effect of either patient or physician reminder interventions on rates of visitation or Pap smear completion. The secondary efficacy analyses demonstrated no overall effect of either patient or physician reminders, but effects among subgroups of women at individual HMO sites were noted. At Site 3, there was an apparent increase in time to the next visit among the subgroup of women with a chronic illness (16 weeks with intervention vs. 9 weeks without). With the physician reminder, the odds that a Pap smear would be given during the study year were increased among women without a previous Pap smear at Site 1 (adjusted odds ratio=1.39) and those with a chronic illness at Site 2 (adjusted odds ratio=3.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Reminders given to patients and physicians had a limited impact on visitation by patients to the HMO sites or Pap smear completion. Although some subgroups of women may benefit, the authors also observed a possibly unfavorable impact among other subgroups. These results emphasize the importance of identifying more effective interventions, targeting them to women most likely to benefit, and not overlooking the possibility that preventive intervention will have an unanticipated adverse effect.

What can patients do to improve health care?

OBJECTIVE: To give an overview of the value of different interventions for increasing the role of individual patients in improving the quality of care provision. SEARCH strategy: Medline searches and manual searches in medical journals covering the period from 1980 until June 1997. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies reporting descriptions and evaluations of seven types of interventions that aim to help integrate the needs and preferences of individual patients into health care provision. DATA EXTRACTION: The following information was extracted: assumptions underlying the interventions; resources needed for development and implementation; and acceptability to clinicians. MAIN RESULTS: Several interventions for increasing patients' roles in health care could be successful in clinical practice, such as feeding forward patient data to clinicians, interactive patient education and feedback to health care providers about patients' evaluations of care. The available research focuses on feedback methods. Insights into the benefits and limitations of the use of the different interventions for improving care are limited. CONCLUSION: The active role that patients' views play in the contact with a care provider is often neglected. Promising interventions for the empowerment of individual patients require further development and evaluation.

A template-based approach to support utilization of clinical practice guidelines within an electronic health record

Practice guidelines are an integral part of evidence-based health care delivery. When the authors decided to install the clinical documentation component of an electronic health record in a nurse practitioner faculty practice, however, they found that they lacked the resources to integrate it immediately with other systems and components that would support the processing of clinical rules. They were thus challenged to devise an initial approach for decision support related to clinical practice guidelines that did not include interfacing with an inference engine and set of decision rules. The authors developed a prototypic application within the WAVE electronic health record that demonstrates the feasibility of representing a guideline as structured encoded text organized into an online patient-encounter template. Although this approach may be more broadly applicable, it is described within the context of the management of diabetes mellitus by nurse practitioners. The advantages of the approach relate primarily to the integration of the guideline recommendations with the encounter form, the online interaction of the clinician with the system, and the ease of creation and modification of the guideline-based encounter form. However, there are several limitations of the current approach as a result of the inability to do inference and the lack of integration with patient-specific data to trigger specific rules.

Family physicians' utilization of a brief smoking cessation program following reinforcement contact after training: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have examined methods of delivery of brief interventions and reinforcement contact and their effects on physicians' utilization of smoking cessation interventions. In this study the objectives were: (1) to determine the ongoing utilization by family physicians of a brief smoking cessation intervention 6 months after a training workshop and (2) to examine the effect of reinforcement contact on physician utilization. A supplementary aim was to assess point prevalence abstinence among patients identified as ready to quit smoking.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled trial of family physicians (98 in the Contact and 100 in the Noncontact group). Training was conducted in a 2-hr workshop. Doctors in the Contact group received three brief telephone calls at 2 weeks, 2 months, and 4 months after training. Main outcome measures were: (1) utilization, determined by responses to a mailed questionnaire about use of the program, and (2) the number of booklets distributed by full-time doctors, collected by practice secretaries or research assistant.

RESULTS

At 6 months 88% of physicians (93% of the Contact group and 84% of the Noncontact group, P = 0.06) were current users of the smoking cessation intervention. Full-time physicians in the Contact group distributed significantly more booklets (40.1) over 6 months than those in the Noncontact group (32.8) (P < 0.05). Twenty-one percent of patients reported not smoking at follow-up at an average of 9.9 months after intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Most doctors continued to use the program 6 months after training and reinforcement contact encouraged greater recruitment of patients.

Clinic HIV-focused features and prevention of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of clinic HIV-focused features and advanced HIV care experience with Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) prophylaxis and development of PCP as the initial AIDS diagnosis.

DESIGN

Nonconcurrent prospective study.

SETTING

New York State Medicaid Program.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicaid enrollees diagnosed with AIDS in 1990-1992.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We collected patient clinical and health care data from Medicaid files, conducted telephone interviews of directors of 125 clinics serving as the usual source of care for study patients, and measured AIDS experience as the cumulative number of AIDS patients treated by the study clinics since 1986. Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia prophylaxis in the 6 months before AIDS diagnosis and PCP at AIDS diagnosis were the main outcome measures. Bivariate and multivariate analyses adjusted for clustering of patients within clinics. Of 1,876 HIV-infected persons, 44% had PCP prophylaxis and 38% had primary PCP. Persons on prophylaxis had 20% lower adjusted odds of developing PCP (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 0.99). The adjusted odds of receiving prophylaxis rose monotonically with the number of HIV-focused features offered by the clinic, with threefold higher odds (95% CI 1.6, 5.7) for six versus two or fewer such features. Patients in clinics with three HIV-focused features had 36% lower adjusted odds of PCP than those in clinics with one or none. Neither clinic experience nor specialty had a significant association with prophylaxis or PCP.

CONCLUSIONS

PCP prevention in our study cohort appears to be more successful in clinics offering an array of HIV-focused features.

A review of cervical cancer screening intervention research: implications for public health programs and future research

In this paper we review the published literature with respect to cervical cancer screening intervention research. Mass media campaigns appear to work best in promoting cervical cancer screening when multiple media are used, when they promote specific screening programs that eliminate or reduce access barriers, or when they are used in combination with other strategies. Many positive examples of using outreach staff to promote cervical cancer screening, as well as using mobile examination rooms in the community, were found. Substantial evidence that letters mailed to patient populations are efficacious was found, especially in promoting interval screening; however, bulk mailings to nonpatient populations have generally not been successful. Both physician and patient prompts have shown promise as well as opportunistic screenings in both the outpatient and the inpatient settings. In addition, several strategies for reducing loss to follow-up among women with abnormal test results were identified, including telephone follow-up, educational mailouts, audiovisual programs, clinic-based educational presentations and workshops, transportation incentives, and economic vouchers. Of special note is the success of other countries in establishing centralized recall systems to promote interval screening for cervical cancer. Ultimately, such systems could replace the need for opportunistic screening in underserved populations and perhaps many community outreach efforts. It is argued that health departments represent a logical starting point for developing a network of recall systems in the United States for underserved women.

Improving the delivery of clinical preventive services to women in managed care organizations: a case study analysis

BACKGROUND

In February-October 1996 a case study analysis was conducted to examine the key features of prevention programs for women in six managed care plans and one group medical practice. These programs, which use either data-based or office-based strategies, are considered by experts in the field to be exemplary.

METHODS

Prevention programs for the case study were identified through a literature review and discussions with knowledgeable individuals about prevention programs and managed care. Information was collected about breast and cervical cancer prevention programs through written materials and telephone interviews with staff. Given limited and noncomparable information, relative program effectiveness was not assessed.

CASE STUDIES

The case study programs use many types of data to support prevention strategies such as patient reminders and performance feedback to providers. Successful programs require substantial resources and planning; are population based; gain the support of providers and patients early; have clear, established systems for collecting and using data; and have a monitoring and evaluation component. The challenges that remain for managed care plans are balancing the need for prevention programs with limited resources, using imperfect data to support interventions, developing effective strategies for reaching high-risk populations, and working with large networks of providers.

DISCUSSION

Managed care plans have great potential to use their information systems and organizational structure to support prevention efforts. The extent to which these opportunities are realized depends on managed care plans' progress in developing their broader information management systems and on purchasers' demands for these types of programs.

Increasing clinical prevention efforts in a family practice residency program through CQI methods

BACKGROUND

As primary care physicians develop ongoing relationships with their patients, each contact provides another opportunity for primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention activities. In 1991 an interdisciplinary prevention project team using continuous quality improvement (CQI) principles was established to improve family practice residents' provision of such services.

DIAGNOSTIC JOURNEY

For a random sample of 60 patient charts, abstractors looked for documentation of 23 clinical preventive services, including nursing screens, physician on-site and off-site implemented services, lifestyle education (diet, tobacco use), and self-screening education. After the chart review, the physicians, nurses, residents, and clinical staff used a fishbone analysis to identify physician-, clinic system-, and patient-centered factors contributing to the lack of conformance with clinical prevention guidelines. REMADIAL JOURNEY: The residency program began a series of didactic sessions on clinical prevention and instituted a procedures rotation to teach prevention procedure skills such as flexible sigmoidoscopy, stress testing, and colposcopy. On the CQI team's recommendation, a checklist developed by physicians and staff which itemized age- and gender-specific clinical prevention services was placed at the front of all patient charts. Clinic-system and patient factors were also addressed. HOLDING THE GAINS--MONITORING PERFORMANCE: The 1993 postintervention chart review showed significant improvements for 17 (81%) of the 21 targeted services.

DISCUSSION

Providing educational sessions on prevention, permitting residents to select the areas of prevention on which to focus, and giving feedback on resident and staff performance through ongoing, nonpunitive monitoring resulted in increased provision of clinical prevention services in a family practice residency training center.