BACKGROUND: Implementation of evidence-based obstetrical practices remains a significant challenge. Effective strategies to disseminate and implement such practices are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 19 hospitals in Argentina and Uruguay to receive a multifaceted behavioral intervention (including selection of opinion leaders, interactive workshops, training of manual skills, one-on-one academic detailing visits with hospital birth attendants, reminders, and feedback) to develop and implement guidelines for the use of episiotomy and management of the third stage of labor or to receive no intervention. The primary outcomes were the rates of prophylactic use of oxytocin during the third stage of labor and of episiotomy. The main secondary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and birth attendants' readiness to change their behavior with regard to episiotomies and management of the third stage of labor. The outcomes were measured at baseline, at the end of the 18-month intervention, and 12 months after the end of the intervention. RESULTS: The rate of use of prophylactic oxytocin increased from 2.1% at baseline to 83.6% after the end of the intervention at hospitals that received the intervention and from 2.6% to 12.3% at control hospitals (P=0.01 for the difference in changes). The rate of use of episiotomy decreased from 41.1% to 29.9% at hospitals receiving the intervention but remained stable at control hospitals, with preintervention and postintervention values of 43.5% and 44.5%, respectively (P<0.001 for the difference in changes). The intervention was also associated with reductions in the rate of postpartum hemorrhage of 500 ml or more (relative rate reduction, 45%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 71) and of 1000 ml or more (relative rate reduction, 70%; 95% CI, 16 to 78). Birth attendants' readiness to change also increased in the hospitals receiving the intervention. The effects on the use of episiotomy and prophylactic oxytocin were sustained 12 months after the end of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted behavioral intervention increased the prophylactic use of oxytocin during the third stage of labor and reduced the use of episiotomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00070720 [ClinicalTrials.gov]; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN82417627 [controlled-trials.com].).
HYPOTHESIS: Physicians seem to learn best from their peers, yet the impact of opinion leaders on physician behavior is unclear. Because colon cancer staging has been identified as being suboptimal in Ontario, Canada, we sought to evaluate the influence of expert and local opinion leaders for colon cancer on optimizing colon cancer lymph node assessment. Design, Setting, PARTICIPANTS: A cluster-randomized trial including all hospitals in Ontario that identified a local opinion leader with intervention between January 5 and June 17, 2004. INTERVENTION: All 42 centers received a standardized lecture about colon cancer lymph node assessment delivered by an expert opinion leader in colon cancer. The 21 intervention hospitals also received academic detailing of a local opinion leader by the expert opinion leader and a toolkit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean number of lymph nodes assessed in patients with stage II colon cancer and the proportion of cases staged with a minimum of 12 lymph nodes before and after a standardized lecture were assessed. RESULTS: Patient demographic and tumor factors were similar in both groups before and after the standardized lecture. Lymph node assessment significantly improved after the standardized lecture at intervention and control sites (P < .001). No additional benefit of academic detailing and toolkit provision in the intervention was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: In-person provision of information by an expert opinion leader in colon cancer may stimulate performance regarding lymph node assessment for colon cancer. Academic detailing of a local opinion leader did not further improve lymph node assessment.
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>Older patients who experience a fragility fracture are at high risk of future fractures but are rarely tested or treated for osteoporosis. We developed a multifaceted intervention directed at older patients with wrist fractures (in the form of telephone-based education) and their physicians (in the form of guidelines endorsed by opinion leaders, supported by reminders) to improve the quality of osteoporosis care.<b>METHODS: </b>In a randomized controlled trial with blinded ascertainment of outcomes, we compared our intervention with usual care (provision of printed educational materials to patients). Eligible patients were those older than 50 years of age who had experienced a wrist fracture and were seen in emergency departments and fracture clinics; we excluded those who were already being treated for osteoporosis. The primary outcome was bisphosphonate treatment within 6 months after the fracture. Secondary outcomes included bone mineral density testing, "appropriate care" (consisting of bone mineral density testing with treatment if bone mass was low) and quality of life.<b>RESULTS: </b>We screened 795 patients for eligibility and randomly assigned 272 to the intervention (137 patients) or control (135 patients) group. The median age was 60 years; 210 (77%) of the subjects were women, and 130 (48%) reported a previous fracture as an adult. Six months after the fracture, 30 (22%) of the intervention patients, as compared with 10 (7%) of the control patients, were receiving bisphosphonate therapy for osteoporosis (adjusted relative risk [RR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-5.1, p = 0.008). Intervention patients were more likely than control patients to undergo bone mineral density testing (71/137 [52%] v. 24/135 [18%]; adjusted RR 2.8, 95% CI 1.9-4.2, p < 0.001) and to receive appropriate care (52/137 [38%] v. 15/135 [11%]; adjusted RR 3.1, 95% CI 1.8-5.3, p < 0.001). There were no differences between the groups in other outcomes. One patient died, and 4 others experienced recurrent fracture.<b>INTERPRETATION: </b>A multifaceted intervention directed at high-risk patients and their physicians substantially increased rates of testing and treatment for osteoporosis. Nevertheless, more than half of the patients in the intervention group were not receiving appropriate care 6 months after their fracture, which suggests that additional strategies should be explored. (ClinicalTrials.gov trial register no. NCT00152321.).
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness of a continuing medical education program, Physician Asthma Care Education, in improving pediatricians' asthma therapeutic and communication skills and patients' health care utilization for asthma. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial in 10 regions in the United States. Primary care providers were recruited and randomly assigned by site to receive the program provided by local faculty. The program included 2 interactive seminar sessions (2.5 hours each) that reviewed national asthma guidelines, communication skills, and key educational messages. Format included short lectures, case discussions, and a video modeling communication techniques. We collected information on parent perceptions of physicians' communication, the child's asthma symptoms, and patients' asthma health care utilization. We used multivariate regression models to determine differences between control and intervention groups. RESULTS: A total of 101 primary care providers and a random sample of 870 of their asthma patients participated. After 1 year, we completed follow-up telephone interviews with the parents of 731 of the 870 patients. Compared to control subjects, parents reported that physicians in the intervention group were more likely to inquire about patients' concerns about asthma, encourage patients to be physically active, and set goals for successful treatment. Patients of physicians that attended the program had a greater decrease in days limited by asthma symptoms (8.5 vs 15.6 days), as well as decreased emergency department asthma visits (0.30 vs 0.55 visits per year). CONCLUSIONS: The Physician Asthma Care Education program was used in a range of locations and was effective in improving parent-reported provider communication skills, the number of days affected by asthma symptoms, and asthma health care use. Patients with more frequent asthma symptoms and higher health care utilization at baseline were more likely to benefit from their physician's participation in the program.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of opinion leaders in raising breast-feeding rates. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial of an opinion leader strategy in 18 hospitals in Central New York State compared mothers' intention to breast-feed during baseline and study years. Multivariate logistic regression with a mixed model analyzed the effects on breast-feeding exclusively and on breast- and formula-feeding combined. RESULTS: Obstetric clinicians had a high degree of knowledge about breast-feeding benefits and of perceived responsibility to recommend breast-feeding. Obstetricians, family practitioners, and midwives agreed on the person identified as the opinion leader, in each case an obstetrician who was chief of obstetrics or obstetrics-gynecology. Breast-feeding rates in hospitals with the opinion leader intervention did not differ significantly from those in control-group hospitals during the study year. CONCLUSION: The opinion leader strategy in this case did not improve breast-feeding rates during the study year. Opinion leader strategies may make assumptions about clinician control that are not justified in situations such as breast-feeding.
The influence of an opinion leader intervention on adherence to Unstable Angina (UA) guidelines compared with a traditional quality improvement model was investigated. In the research and design, a group-randomized controlled trial with 2210 patients from 21 hospitals was designed. There were three intervention arms: (1) no intervention (N1); (2) a traditional Health Care Quality Improvement Program (HCQIP); and (3) a physician opinion leader in addition to the HCQIP model (OL). Quality indicators included: electrocardiogram within 20 minutes, antiplatelet therapy within 24 hours and at discharge, and heparin and β-blockers during hospitalization. Hospitals could determine the specific indicators they wished to target. Potential cases of UA were identified from Medicare claims data. The result show that the only statistically significant postintervention difference in percentage compliant was greater improvement for the OL group in the use of antiplatelet therapy at 24 hours in both hospital level ( <i>P</i> = 0.01) and patient level analyses ( <i>P</i> <0.05) compared with the HCQIP and N1 groups. The conclusion is that the influence of physician opinion leaders was unequivocally positive for only one of five quality indicators. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
We studied whether a hospital intervention utilizing medical opinion leaders and performance feedback reduced the proportion of women who reported that surgeons did not discuss options prior to surgery for early stage breast cancer. Opinion leaders provided clinical education to their peers using a variety of strategies and were selected for their ability to influence their peers. Performance feedback involved distributing performance reports that contained data on the outcomes of interest as well as on other treatment patterns. Twenty-eight hospitals in Minnesota were randomized to the intervention or to a control group that received performance feedback only. The proportion of patients at intervention hospitals who said that their surgeon did not discuss options decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from 33% to 17%, but a similar decrease was observed among control hospitals. Using medical opinion leaders to intervene in hospitals appeared as effective as performance feedback.
