R.P.T.M. Grol

Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions

To design potentially successful quality improvement (QI) interventions, it is crucial to make use of detailed breakdowns of the implementation processes of successful and unsuccessful interventions. Process evaluation can throw light on the mechanisms responsible for the result obtained in the intervention group. It enables researchers and implementers to (1) describe the intervention in detail, (2) check actual exposure to the intervention, and (3) describe the experience of those exposed. This paper presents a framework containing features of QI interventions that might influence success. Attention is paid to features of the target group, the implementers or change agents, the frequency of intervention activities, and features of the information imparted. The framework can be used as a starting point to address all three aspects of process evaluation mentioned above. Process evaluation can be applied to small scale improvement projects, controlled QI studies, and large scale QI programmes; in each case it plays a different role.

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.

Acquisition of communication skills in postgraduate training for general practice.

Purpose  The evidence suggests that a longitudinal training of communication skills embedded in a rich clinical context is most effective. In this study we evaluated the acquisition of communication skills under such conditions.

Safety of telephone triage in general practitioner cooperatives: do triage nurses correctly estimate urgency?

Background: In recent years, there has been a growth in the use of triage nurses to decrease general practitioner (GP) workloads and increase the efficiency of telephone triage. The actual safety of decisions made by triage nurses has not yet been assessed. Objectives: To investigate whether triage nurses accurately estimate the urgency level of health complaints when using the national telephone guidelines, and to examine the relationship between the performance of triage nurses and their education and training. Method: A cross-sectional, multicentre, observational study employing five mystery (simulated) patients who telephoned triage nurses in four GP cooperatives. The mystery patients played standardised roles. Each role had one of four urgency levels as determined by experts. The triage nurses called were asked to estimate the level of urgency after the contact. This level of urgency was compared with a gold standard. Results: Triage nurses estimated the level of urgency of 69% of the 352 contacts correctly and underestimated the level of urgency of 19% of the contacts. The sensitivity and specificity of the urgency estimates provided by the triage nurses were found to be 0.76 and 0.95, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values of the urgency estimates were 0.83 and 0.93, respectively. A significant correlation was found between correct estimation of urgency and specific training on the use of the guidelines. The educational background (primary or secondary care) of the nurses had no significant relationship with the rate of underestimation. Conclusion: Telephone triage by triage nurses is efficient but possibly not safe, with potentially severe consequences for the patient. An educational programme for triage nurses is recommended. Also, a direct second safety check of all cases by a specially trained GP telephone doctor is advisable.

Patients either contacting a general practice cooperative or accident and emergency department out of hours: a comparison

Introduction: Lack of collaboration between general practice (GP) cooperatives and accident and emergency (A&E) departments and many self referrals may lead to inefficient out-of-hours care. Methods: We retrospectively analysed the records of all patients contacting the GP cooperative and all patients self referring to the A&E department out of hours in a region in the Netherlands. Results: 258 patients contacted the GP cooperative and 43 self referred to the A&E department per 1000 patients per year. A wide range of problems were seen in the GP cooperative, mainly related to infections (26.2%). The A&E department had a smaller range of problems, mainly related to trauma (66.1%). Relatively few urgent problems were seen in the GP cooperative (4.6%) or for self referrals in the A&E department (6.1%). Women, children, the elderly, and rural patients chose the GP cooperative significantly more often, as did men and patients with less urgent complaints, infections, and heart and airway problems. Discussion: The contact frequency of self referrals to the A&E department is much lower than that at the GP cooperative. Care is complementary: the A&E department focuses on trauma while the GP cooperative deals with a wide range of problems. The self referrals concern mostly minor, non-urgent problems and can generally be treated by the general practitioner, by a nurse, or by advice over the telephone, particularly in the case of optimal collaboration in an integrated care facility of GP cooperatives and A&E departments with one access point to medical care for all patients.

Multifaceted support to improve clinical decision making in diabetes care: a randomized controlled trial in general practice

Aims To evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to improve the clinical decision making of general practitioners (GPs) for patients with diabetes. To identify practice characteristics which predict success.

Changing preventive practice: a controlled trial on the effects of outreach visits to organise prevention of cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of outreach visits by trained nurse facilitators on the organisation of services used to prevent cardiovascular disease. To identify the characteristics of general practices that determined success. DESIGN: A non-randomised controlled trial of two methods of implementing guidelines to organise prevention of cardiovascular disease: an innovative outreach visit method compared with a feedback method. The results in both groups were compared with data from a control group. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: 95 general practices in two regions in The Netherlands. INTERVENTIONS: Trained nurse facilitators visited practices, focusing on solving problems in the organisation of prevention. They applied a four step model in each practice. The number of visits depended on the needs of the practice team. The feedback method consisted of the provision of a feedback report with advice specific to each practice and standardised instructions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of practices adhering to 10 different guidelines. Guidelines were on the detection of patients at risk, their follow up, the registration of preventive activities, and teamwork within the practice. RESULTS: Outreach visits were more effective than feedback in implementing guidelines to organise prevention. Within the group with outreach visits, the increase in the number of practices adhering to the guidelines was significant for six out of 10 guidelines. Within the feedback group, a comparison of data before and after intervention showed no significant differences. Partnerships and practices with a computer changed more. CONCLUSION: Outreach visits by trained nurse facilitators proved to be effective in implementing guidelines within general practices, probably because their help was practical and designed for the individual practice, guided by the wishes and capabilities of the practice team.

Predictive validity of a written knowledge test of skills for an OSCE in postgraduate training for general practice

Purpose  To examine the validity of a written knowledge test of skills for performance on an OSCE in postgraduate training for general practice.

Lower urinary tract symptoms: social influence is more important than symptoms in seeking medical care

Objective  To determine associations among lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), symptom severity, subjective beliefs and social influences when seeking primary medical care in men aged ≥ 50 years.

Practice visits as a tool in quality improvement: mutual visits and feedback by peers compared with visits and feedback by non-physician observers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the effects of two programmes of assessment of practice management in a practice visit: mutual visits and feedback by peers compared with visits and feedback by non-physician observers. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised intervention study, with follow up after one year. SETTING: General practices in the Netherlands in 1993 and 1994. SUBJECTS: A total of 90 general practitioners (GPs) in 68 practices; follow up after one year comprised 81 GPs in 62 practices. MAIN MEASURES: Scores on indicators and dimensions of practice management in the visit instrument to assess practice management and organisation (a validated Dutch method to assess practice management in a practice visit). Change was defined as the difference in score between the first visit and the visit after one year on 208 indicators and on 33 dimensions of practice management. RESULTS: Data of 44 mutual visits by peers were compared with data of 46 visits by non-physician observers. After a year both programmes showed improvements on many aspects of practice management, but different aspects changed in each of the two programmes. After mutual practice visits, GPs scored significantly higher on content of the doctors bag, on collaboration with colleagues, on collaboration with other care providers, and on accessibility of patient information than after a visit by a non-physician observer. The visits by non-physician observers resulted in a higher score on extent of use of records and on assessment on outcome and year report. CONCLUSION: Change after mutual practice visits and feedback by peers is more marked than after a visit and feedback by a non-physician observer.