Printed Educational Materials
|
12 randomised trials
|
Median absolute improvement of care on categorical process outcomes (e.g., x-ray requests, prescribing and smoking cessation activities) of 4.3% (range −8.0% to +9.6%) across studies.
|
|
11 nonrandomised studies
|
|
Farmer et al.[37]
|
|
|
Educational Meetings
|
81 randomised trials (involving more than 11,000 health professionals)
|
Median absolute improvement in care of 6.0% (interquartile range +1.8% to 15.3%).
|
Forsetlund et al.[38]
|
|
|
|
|
Larger effects were associated with higher attendance rates, mixed interactive and didactic meetings and interactive meetings.
|
|
|
Smaller effects were observed for complex behaviours and for less serious outcomes.
|
Educational Outreach
|
69 randomised trials (involving more than 15,000 health professionals)
|
Median absolute improvements in:
|
|
|
·prescribing behaviours (17 comparisons) of 4.8% (interquartile range +3.0% to + 6.5%);
|
O’Brien et al.[39]
|
|
|
|
|
·other behaviours (17 comparisons) of 6.0% (interquartile range +3.6% to +16.0%).
|
|
|
The effects of educational outreach for changing more complex behaviours are less certain.
|
Local Opinion Leaders
|
18 randomised trials (involving more than 296 hospitals and 318 primary care physicians)
|
Median absolute improvement of care of 12.0% across studies (interquartile range +6.0% to +14.5%).
|
Flodgren et al.[40]
|
|
|
Audit and Feedback
|
118 randomised trials
|
Median absolute improvement of care of 5.0% (interquartile range +3% to +11%).
|
Jamtvedt et al.[41]
|
|
|
|
|
In general, larger effects were seen if baseline compliance was low.
|
Computerized Reminders
|
28 randomised trials
|
Median absolute improvement of care of 4.2% (interquartile range +0.8% to +18.8%).
|
Shojania et al.[42]
|
|
|
|
|
Comment: Most studies have examined the effects of relatively simple reminders; the results of more complex decision support systems, especially for chronic disease management, have been less successful.
|
Tailored Interventions
|
26 randomised trials
|
Meta-regression using 12 randomised trials. Pooled odds ratio of 1.52 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.82, p < .001)
|
Baker et al.[43] |
|
|