Buffington 1991
| Methods | Purpose: to compare displaying clinic and individual physician influenza vaccination uptake on posters plus postcard reminders to participants to displaying clinic and individual physician influenza vaccination uptake on posters to no intervention Design: RCT, clinics as unit of randomisation Duration of study: 23 September to 30 December 1989 Interval between intervention and when outcome was measured: from 23 September to 30 December 1989 Power computation: not performed Statistics: not stated; probabilities reported | |
| Participants | Country: USA Setting: 45 physicians in 3 offices associated with Genesee Hospital, Rochester, NY Eligible participants: (health status): ≥ 65 Age: ≥ 65 Gender: not stated | |
| Interventions | Intervention 1: display of clinic and individual physician influenza vaccination uptake on posters plus postcard reminders to participants Intervention 2: display of clinic and individual physician influenza vaccination uptake on posters Control: no intervention E‐mail from author: "What was interesting was the competition that evolved in those physicians that used the target model. Physicians using the target model did compare their progress with other physician's results. The whole effort generated a pretty positive attitude toward getting the elderly immunized against influenza." | |
| Outcomes | Outcome measured: % influenza vaccination Time points from the study that are considered in the review or measured or reported in the study: 23 September to 30 December 1989 % vaccinated by: 30 December | |
| Notes | Funding: Medicare Influenza Demonstration Project sponsored by US Health Care Finance Administration | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | "Practices were stratified according to size and randomised." (no statement about method) |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No statement |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No statement, but influenza vaccination uptake from computerised billing codes, or line listing of vaccinees in practices not computerised |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 2149 in Group 2 (poster), 3604 in group 3 (poster and postcard) and 4772 in Group 3 (control), but no statement how many letters returned undelivered; influenza vaccination uptake from computerised billing codes, or line listing of vaccinees in practices not computerised |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | No selective reporting |