Original articleAttributes of clinical recommendations that influence change in practice following audit and feedback
Introduction
The implementation of valid clinical guidelines can improve the quality of health care [1]. Passive dissemination of a guideline is unlikely to lead to changes in clinical practice [2]. Combining more active interventions, such as reminders or interactive education, with guideline dissemination and implementation is more likely to change professional and organizational practice.
Various factors, or effect modifiers, can influence the effectiveness of such interventions [3]. Until recently, most research has focused on characteristics of clinicians or health care organizations, such as local attitudes or preparedness to change. However, the characteristics of clinical practice recommendations themselves may also influence their rate of adoption [4].
Grilli and Lomas first assessed the association between such characteristics and compliance with clinical guideline recommendations [5]. They reviewed published studies reporting compliance rates with 143 different recommendations developed or endorsed by official organizations. Compliance was higher for recommendations displaying “trialability” (which could be tried out temporarily and discarded if found wanting) and lower for complex recommendations. The “observability” of recommendations (how readily their benefits could be seen to be achieved) had no impact.
Grol et al. [6] assessed the extent to which Dutch general practitioners' compliance with 47 guideline recommendations was influenced by 12 characteristics (or attributes) of the recommendations. The guidelines were disseminated via journals and continuing medical education programs. Compliance was lower if recommendations were vaguely worded, incompatible with clinician norms and values, and disruptive to routine practice.
This previous work focused on the effects of various attributes on compliance with recommendations (i.e., a one-off measure of performance). However, clinical guidelines are produced to promote change in behavior (i.e., hereafter referring to a decrease or increase in compliance), which may be influenced by attributes different from those associated with compliance. We investigated whether various attributes of clinical practice recommendations influenced both compliance and change in clinical behavior among specialists participating in a national audit program.
Section snippets
Methods
Table 1 summarizes the context and main steps of this study, now described in detail.
Panel rating of GAPS recommendations
The number of clinical recommendations displaying each attribute varied widely (Table 2). For example, 40 (95%) of the 42 recommendations were judged to precisely describe recommended clinical practice, and 41 (98%) as addressing a common clinical issue. None were judged as requiring new knowledge or skills, and only 3 (7%) each as trialable or as complex.
The five attributes (precisely described, addresses common issue, requires new knowledge or skills, complex and trialable) displayed by over
Principal findings
Certain attributes of clinical practice recommendations were associated with variations in compliance and behavior change before and after an audit and feedback program in secondary care. Consistent with previous work [6], recommendations compatible with clinician norms and values and not requiring changed routines were independently associated with higher compliance. However, clinical practice recommendations are intended to change behavior, and a different picture emerged when changes in
Contributors
R.F. participated in designing the study, running the consensus panel, and data analysis. G.M. analyzed the data. J.G. suggested the original idea for the study, and participated in its design and analysis. G.P. participated in design of the study, operation of the consensus panel, and the original audit data collection. M.C. participated in design and analysis. R.G. participated in design of the study. All contributors participated in the writing of the study. R.F. is guarantor for the study.
Acknowledgements
The Health Services Research Unit is funded by the Chief Scientist Office (CSO), and the Scottish Programme for Clinical Effectiveness in Reproductive Health is funded by the Clinical Resource and Audit Group, both of the Scottish Executive Health Department. Robbie Foy was funded by a Medical Research Council/CSO training fellowship in health services research. However. the views expressed reflect those of the authors and not the funding bodies. We are grateful to the consultant gynecologists
References (20)
- et al.
Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines
BMJ
(1999) - et al.
Closing the gap between research and practicean overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings
BMJ
(1998) Teaching old (and not so old) docs new trickseffective ways to implement research findings
Diffusion of Innovations
(1995)- et al.
Evaluating the messagethe relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline
Med Care
(1994) - et al.
Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practiceobservational study
BMJ
(1998) - et al.
Audit and feedback versus alternative strategieseffects on professional practice and health care outcomes. The Cochrane Library
(2001) - et al.
A multi-centre, criterion-based audit of the management of induced abortion in Scotland
BMJ
(1994) - et al.
Laparoscopic sterilisationopinion and practice among gynaecologists in Scotland
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
(1997) - et al.
Endometrial assessment proceduresan audit of current practice in Scotland
Hum Reprod
(1997)