Study | Interventions compared | Outcome | Int pre (%) |
C pre (%) |
Int post n/N (%) | C post n/N (%) | Relative % change (post) | Int vs C absolute change from pre (%) | ARD | Absolute % change (post) | P value |
Eccles 2001 | A&F + ed mat vs ed mat | X‐ray concordant with guideline (knee) | ‐ | ‐ | 52/240 (21.7) | 83/328 (25.3) | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | ‐3.6 | NS |
Reminder + ed mat vs ed mat | X‐ray concordant with guideline (knee) | ‐ | ‐ | 26/85 (30.6) | 83/328 (25.3) | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | 5.3 | NS | |
A&F + reminder + ed mat vs ed mat | X‐ray concordant with guideline (knee) | ‐ | ‐ | 70/252 (27.8) | 83/328 (25.3) | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | 2.5 | NS | |
Oakeshott 1994 | Ed mat vs control | X‐ray requests by practice conforming to guidelines (limbs & joints) | (85.7) | (87.2) | (88.8)* | (83.6)* | 6.2 | 3.1 vs ‐3.6 | 6.7 | 5.2 | NS |