Thomson O'Brien M A, Oxman A D, Davis D A, Haynes R B, Freemantle N, Harvey E L
McMaster Evidence-based Practice Centre, McMaster University, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, HSC 3H7, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8N 3Z5.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(2):CD000259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000259.
Audit and feedback has been identified as having the potential to change the practice of health care professionals.
To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of health professionals and patient outcomes.
We searched MEDLINE up to June 1997, the Research and Development Resource Base in Continuing Medical Education, and reference lists of related systematic reviews and articles.
Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as any summary of clinical performance of health care over a specified period of time). The participants were health care professionals responsible for patient care.
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.
Thirty-seven studies were included, involving more than 4977 physicians. The reporting of study methods was inadequate for almost all studies. In 31 out of 37 studies the randomisation process could not be determined. Information regarding data analysis was also lacking. For example, power calculations were not mentioned in 27 out of 37 studies. A variety of behaviours were targeted including the reduction of diagnostic test ordering, prescribing practices, preventive care, and the general management of a problem, for example hypertension. Twenty-eight studies measured physician performance, one study targeted patient outcomes in diabetes and the remaining eight studies measured both physician performance and patient outcomes. The relative percentage differences ranged from -16% to 152%. The clinical importance of the changes was not always clear.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Audit and feedback can sometimes be effective in improving the practice of health care professionals, in particular prescribing and diagnostic test ordering. When it is effective, the effects appear to be small to moderate but potentially worthwhile. Those attempting to enhance professional behaviour should not rely solely on this approach.
审核与反馈已被认定有改变医疗保健专业人员行为的潜力。
评估审核与反馈对医疗专业人员行为及患者治疗结果的影响。
我们检索了截至1997年6月的MEDLINE、继续医学教育研究与发展资源库以及相关系统评价和文章的参考文献列表。
审核与反馈的随机试验(定义为特定时间段内医疗保健临床绩效的任何总结)。参与者为负责患者护理的医疗保健专业人员。
两名评价者独立提取数据并评估研究质量。
纳入37项研究,涉及4977多名医生。几乎所有研究的研究方法报告都不充分。37项研究中有31项无法确定随机化过程。也缺乏数据分析方面的信息。例如,37项研究中有27项未提及效能计算。目标行为多种多样,包括减少诊断检查的开具、处方行为、预防保健以及某一问题(如高血压)的总体管理。28项研究测量了医生的行为,1项研究以糖尿病患者的治疗结果为目标,其余8项研究同时测量了医生行为和患者治疗结果。相对百分比差异在-16%至152%之间。这些变化的临床重要性并不总是明确的。
审核与反馈有时可有效改善医疗保健专业人员的行为,尤其是在处方和诊断检查开具方面。当它有效时,效果似乎较小到中等,但可能是值得的。试图改善专业行为的人不应仅依赖这种方法。