Peremans Lieve, Rethans Jan Joost, Verhoeven Veronique, Coenen Samuel, Debaene Luc, Meulemans Herman, Denekens Joke, Van Royen Paul
Department of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, Faculty of Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp-Wilrijk, Belgium.
Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010 Aug;15(4):280-9. doi: 10.3109/13625187.2010.492882.
Evidence-based clinical guidelines on contraceptive use were developed and distributed among all Flemish general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium.
To evaluate the effectiveness of two strategies for implementing a guideline on oral contraceptives in order to enhance the quality of the first contraception consultation in general practice, by either empowering patients or by introducing a computer decision support system (CDSS).
A random sample of 45 GPs was distributed among three study groups. One group was visited by an 'empowered patient', one group's electronic medical record was supplemented with a CDSS, and one group served as the control group. Simulated patients (SPs) assessed the performance of GPs in daily practice before and after the interventions, using a validated 48-point checklist.
The baseline mean score of the 43 GPs was 26.16 (SD = 5.76). The SPs received sufficient information about correct pill usage, but not concerning factors associated with pill failure and drug interaction. After the intervention, the GPs' mean score was 26.39 (SD = 6.86). Only the intervention group with the 'empowered patient' scored significantly better (29.92 [SD = 7.11]). The computer group and control group scored lower (24.36 [SD = 6.60] and 24.82 [SD = 5.65], respectively).
Developing and distributing an evidence-based guideline did not change GPs' behaviour. However, empowering patients to participate more proactively significantly improved GPs' performance during a contraception consultation. A CDSS did not.
比利时弗拉芒地区所有全科医生(GP)都收到了关于避孕措施使用的循证临床指南。
通过赋予患者权力或引入计算机决策支持系统(CDSS),评估两种实施口服避孕药指南的策略的有效性,以提高全科医疗中首次避孕咨询的质量。
从45名全科医生中随机抽取样本,分为三个研究组。一组由“赋权患者”进行访问,一组在电子病历中添加CDSS,一组作为对照组。模拟患者(SP)在干预前后使用经过验证的48分清单评估全科医生在日常实践中的表现。
43名全科医生的基线平均分为26.16(标准差 = 5.76)。模拟患者获得了关于正确服药方法的充分信息,但未获得与服药失败和药物相互作用相关的因素的信息。干预后,全科医生的平均分为26.39(标准差 = 6.86)。只有“赋权患者”干预组得分显著更高(29.92 [标准差 = 7.11])。计算机组和对照组得分较低(分别为24.36 [标准差 = 6.60]和24.82 [标准差 = 5.65])。
制定和分发循证指南并未改变全科医生的行为。然而,赋予患者更积极参与的权力显著改善了避孕咨询期间全科医生的表现。计算机决策支持系统则没有。