Randomised controlled trial of a theoretically grounded tailored intervention to diffuse evidence-based public health practice [ISRCTN23257060]. Toward dissemination of evidence-based family interventions: maintenance of community-based partnership recruitment results and associated factors. Can a facilitated programme promote effective multidisciplinary audit in secondary care teams? An exploratory trial. Strategies for improving the quality of health care in maternal and child health in low- and middle-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Effects of paying physicians based on their relative performance for quality. A national evaluation of school breakfast clubs: evidence from a cluster randomized controlled trial and an observational analysis. Impact of centralized intake on case management services. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies. An outreach intervention to implement evidence based practice in residential care: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN67855475].
Previous studies have shown that Norwegian public health physicians do not systematically and explicitly use scientific evidence in their practice. They work in an environment that does not encourage the integration of this information in decision-making. In this study we investigate whether a theoretically grounded tailored intervention to diffuse evidence-based public health practice increases the physicians' use of research information.
                148 self-selected public health physicians were randomised to an intervention group (n = 73) and a control group (n = 75). The intervention group received a multifaceted intervention while the control group received a letter declaring that they had access to library services. Baseline assessments before the intervention and post-testing immediately at the end of a 1.5-year intervention period were conducted. The intervention was theoretically based and consisted of a workshop in evidence-based public health, a newsletter, access to a specially designed information service, to relevant databases, and to an electronic discussion list. The main outcome measure was behaviour as measured by the use of research in different documents.
                The intervention did not demonstrate any evidence of effects on the objective behaviour outcomes. We found, however, a statistical significant difference between the two groups for both knowledge scores: Mean difference of 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2-0.6) in the score for knowledge about EBM-resources and mean difference of 0.2 (95% CI: 0.0-0.3) in the score for conceptual knowledge of importance for critical appraisal. There were no statistical significant differences in attitude-, self-efficacy-, decision-to-adopt- or job-satisfaction scales. There were no significant differences in Cochrane library searching after controlling for baseline values and characteristics.
                Though demonstrating effect on knowledge the study failed to provide support for the hypothesis that a theory-based multifaceted intervention targeted at identified barriers will change professional behaviour. A major challenge in the dissemination of evidence-based family interventions (EBFIs) designed to reduce youth substance use and other problem behaviors is effective and sustainable community-based recruitment. This understudied topic is addressed by a preliminary study of 14 community-university partnership teams randomly assigned to an intervention condition in which teams attempted sustained implementation of EBFIs with two cohorts of middle school families. This report describes attendance rates of recruited families maintained over time and across both cohorts, along with exploratory analyses of factors associated with those rates. When compared with community-based recruitment rates in the literature, particularly for multisession interventions, relatively high rates were observed; they averaged 17% across cohorts. Community team functioning (e.g., production of quality team promotional materials) and technical assistance (TA) variables (e.g., effective collaboration with TA, frequency of TA requests) were associated with higher recruitment rates, even after controlling for community and school district contextual influences. Results support the community-university partnership model for recruitment that was implemented in the study. This 24-month exploratory study evaluated whether a 6-month programme supported by a trained external facilitator was feasible, acceptable and led to the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach to audit by secondary care staff. Undertaken in five acute hospital sites in the East Midlands UK, 22 multidisciplinary teams were randomised to either an intervention or control arm. Employing mixed methods, a range of outcomes, including collaborative behaviour, was measured. The intervention was feasible and acceptable to staff. Involvement in the facilitated programme had a positive impact on self-reported knowledge (P=0.000 post-intervention and at 4-months follow-up), skills (P=0.000 post-intervention and P=0.02 at 4-months follow-up) and attitudes (P<0.01 post-intervention), appeared to have some influence on improving self-reported (P<0.05 post-intervention) and observed collaborative behaviour (P=0.01) and led to better quality audit resulting in measurable improvements to care. Improved collaborative behaviour may have resulted from an increase in assertive behaviour by nurses. Research to test approaches to support teams to work effectively together is currently hampered by a lack of suitable research instruments and needs addressing before main (phase 111) trials are undertaken. There are many systematic reviews of continuing education programmes and educational strategies for quality improvement in health care. Most of the reviewed studies are one-off evaluations rather than impact evaluations with long-term follow-up. There are few systematic reviews of organisational, financial and regulatory interventions, and few high-quality studies. These interventions are probably as or more important than educational strategies, although they are less well evaluated. Few studies have been undertaken in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) or that address maternal and child health (MCH). Thus, the results of the available studies and reviews need to be interpreted cautiously when applied to LMIC. Interactive workshops, reminders and multifaceted interventions can improve professional practice, and they generally have moderate effects. Educational outreach visits consistently improve prescribing but have variable effects on other behaviours. Audit and feedback interventions have variable effects on professional practice, but most often these are small to moderate effects. Mass-media and patient-mediated interventions may change professional practice. Multifaceted interventions that combine several quality-improvement strategies are also effective but may not be more so than single interventions. While all of these strategies are applicable to MCH in LMIC, the applicability of the results to rural settings, in particular, may be limited. Use of these strategies could exacerbate inequalities, and this should be taken into consideration when planning implementation. Scaling up and sustainability may be difficult to achieve in LMIC contexts and need careful consideration. The use of financial interventions has not been well studied; financial incentives and disincentives may be difficult to use effectively and efficiently, although their impact on practice needs to be considered. Organisational interventions are likely to be important, given that there are often underlying organisational or system problems. Regulatory interventions have not been well evaluated, but may sometimes be both inexpensive and effective. There are no 'magic bullets' or simple solutions for ensuring the quality of health care services. Interventions should be selected or tailored to address the underlying reasons for a failure to deliver effective services. Decision-makers should select the most appropriate interventions for specific problems. This requires a governance structure that clearly assigns responsibility for quality-improvement activities, priority setting, selection and design of interventions, and evaluation. Studies examining the effectiveness of pay-for-performance programs to improve quality of care primarily have been confined to bonus-type arrangements that reward providers for performance above a predetermined threshold. No studies to date have evaluated programs placing providers at financial risk for performance relative to other participants in the program.
                The objective of the study is to evaluate the impact of an incentive program conferring limited financial risk to primary care physicians.
                There were 334 participating primary care physicians in Rochester, New York.
                The design of the study is a retrospective cohort study using pre/post analysis.
                The measurements adhere to 4 diabetes performance measures between 1999 and 2004.
                While absolute performance levels increased across all measures immediately following implementation, there was no difference between the post- and pre-intervention trends indicating that the overall increase in performance was largely a result of secular trends. However, there was evidence of a modest 1-time improvement in physician adherence for eye examination that appeared attributable to the incentive program. For this measure, physicians improved their adherence rate on average by 7 percentage points in the year after implementation of the program.
                This study demonstrates a modest effect in improving provider adherence to quality standards for a single measure of diabetes care during the early phase of a pay-for-performance program that placed physicians under limited financial risk. Further research is needed to determine the most effective incentive structures for achieving substantial gains in quality of care. To measure the health, educational and social impacts of breakfast club provision in schools serving deprived areas across England.
                A cluster randomized controlled trial and an observational analysis.
                England, the UK. Intervention: funding to establish a school-based breakfast club vs. control (no funding).
                Intention to treat analysis showed improved concentration (Trail Making Test Part A) amongst the intervention group at 3 months. Fewer pupils within the intervention group reported having skipped classes within the last month and fewer pupils within the intervention group reported having skipped 1 or more days of school within the last month at 1 year. Observational analysis at 1 year showed a higher proportion of primary-aged breakfast club attendees reported eating fruit for breakfast in comparison to non-attendees. A higher proportion of breakfast club attendees had borderline or abnormal conduct and total difficulties scores (primary-aged pupils) and prosocial score (secondary-aged pupils).
                Analyses revealed a mixed picture of benefit and apparent disbenefit. This study illustrated the challenges of evaluating a complex intervention in which the evaluators had less control than is usual in randomized trials over recruitment, eligibility checking and implementation. If the impact of new policy initiatives is to be assessed using the most robust forms of evaluation, social policy needs to be organized so that evaluations can be constructed as experiments. This is likely to prove most difficult where the perceived value of implementing an intervention rapidly is high. The Chicago Target Cities demonstration project was designed to improve the effectiveness and accessibility of substance abuse treatment in large metropolitan areas. The primary interventions included centralized intake (CIU), comprehensive standardized assessment procedures, and management of a centralized wait list. A part of this project, the effectiveness of a case management model implemented through the CIU, was tested. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, case management (CM) or no case management (No-CM). The primary objectives of the CIU case management model were to improve the show rate to treatment, provide referrals to ancillary services, and to support treatment completion. Participants in both groups could also receive other support services provided by staff for the treatment agencies. CM participants were significantly more likely to show to treatment (78.9%) than No-CM participants (71.8%). Case management was found to primarily improve the show rates for younger participants, who without CM were significantly less likely to show for treatment than older participants. CM participants were significantly more likely to receive referrals to non substance abuse treatment services than No-CM participants, although the number of referrals was low in both conditions. No differences were found in the amount or length of substance abuse treatment services received by participants in the two conditions. Significant resources and time are invested in the production of research knowledge. The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three knowledge translation and exchange strategies in the incorporation of research evidence into public health policies and programs.
                This trial was conducted with a national sample of public health departments in Canada from 2004 to 2006. The three interventions, implemented over one year in 2005, included access to an online registry of research evidence; tailored messaging; and a knowledge broker. The primary outcome assessed the extent to which research evidence was used in a recent program decision, and the secondary outcome measured the change in the sum of evidence-informed healthy body weight promotion policies or programs being delivered at health departments. Mixed-effects models were used to test the hypotheses.
                One hundred and eight of 141 (77%) health departments participated in this study. No significant effect of the intervention was observed for primary outcome (p < 0.45). However, for public health policies and programs (HPPs), a significant effect of the intervention was observed only for tailored, targeted messages (p < 0.01). The treatment effect was moderated by organizational research culture (e.g., value placed on research evidence in decision making).
                The results of this study suggest that under certain conditions tailored, targeted messages are more effective than knowledge brokering and access to an online registry of research evidence. Greater emphasis on the identification of organizational factors is needed in order to implement strategies that best meet the needs of individual organizations.
                The trial registration number and title are as follows: ISRCTN35240937 -- Is a knowledge broker more effective than other strategies in promoting evidence-based physical activity and healthy body weight programming? The aim of this project was to assess whether outreach visits would improve the implementation of evidence based clinical practice in the area of falls reduction and stroke prevention in a residential care setting.
                Twenty facilities took part in a randomized controlled trial with a seven month follow-up period. Two outreach visits were delivered by a pharmacist. At the first a summary of the relevant evidence was provided and at the second detailed audit information was provided about fall rates, psychotropic drug prescribing and stroke risk reduction practices (BP monitoring, aspirin and warfarin use) for the facility relevant to the physician. The effect of the interventions was determined via pre- and post-intervention case note audit. Outcomes included change in percentage patients at risk of falling who fell in a three month period prior to follow-up and changes in use of psychotropic medications. Chi-square tests, independent samples t-test, and logistic regression were used in the analysis.
                Data were available from case notes at baseline (n = 897) and seven months follow-up (n = 902), 452 residential care staff were surveyed and 121 physicians were involved with 61 receiving outreach visits. Pre-and post-intervention data were available for 715 participants. There were no differences between the intervention and control groups for the three month fall rate. We were unable to detect statistically significant differences between groups for the psychotropic drug use of the patients before or after the intervention. The exception was significantly greater use of "as required" antipsychotics in the intervention group compared with the control group after the pharmacy intervention (RR = 4.95; 95%CI 1.69-14.50). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for the numbers of patients "at risk of stroke" on aspirin at follow-up.
                While the strategy was well received by the physicians involved, there was no change in prescribing patterns. Patient care in residential settings is complex and involves contributions from the patient's physician, family and residential care staff. The project highlights challenges of delivering evidence based care in a setting in which there is a paucity of well controlled trial evidence but where significant health outcomes can be attained.
The current evidence base is too weak to draw general conclusions; more robust and also comprehensive studies are needed. Performance-based funding is not a uniform intervention, but rather a range of approaches. Its effects depend on the interaction of several variables, including the design of the intervention (e.g. who receives payments, the magnitude of the incentives, the targets and how they are measured), the amount of additional funding, other ancillary components such as technical support, and contextual factors, including the organisational context in which it is implemented.