Comparing cost effects of two quality strategies to improve test ordering in primary care: A randomized trial

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 391-398

  Verstappen, Wim H J M ^a,b   Van Merode, Frits ^a   Grimshaw, Jeremy ^c   Dubois, Willy I ^a   Grol, Richard P T M ^a   Van der Weijden, Trudy ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b St Jans Hospital   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Costs; Costs analysis; Diagnostic tests; Feedback; Health care; Quality assurance; Routine

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTINUING EDUCATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FOLLOW UP; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL PRACTICE; NETHERLANDS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE;

EID: 5444254389     PISSN: 13534505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh070     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Mason J, Eccles M, Freemantle N et al. A framework for incorporating cost-effectiveness in evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Health Policy 1999; 47: 37-52.
2. Sculpher M. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the utilization of evidence-based guidelines. Fam Pract 2000; 17: 26-31.
3. Mauskopf JA, Paul JE, Grant DM et al. The role of cost-consequence analysis in healthcare decision-making. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 277-288.
4. McIntosh E, Donaldson C, Ryan M. Recent advances in the methods of cost-benefit analysis in healthcare. Matching the art to the science. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 357-367.
5. Leurquin P, Van Casteren V, De Maeseneer J. Use of blood tests in general practice: a collaborative study in eight European countries. Eurosentinel Study Group. Br J Gen Pract 1995; 45: 21-25.
6. Kristiansen IS, Hjortdahl P. The general practitioner and laboratory utilization: why does it vary? Fam Pract 1992; 9: 22-27.
7. Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis DA, Haynes RB. No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. Can Med Assoc J 1995; 153: 1423-1431.
8. Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM et al. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. Br Med J 1998; 317: 465-468.
9. Solomon DH, Hashimoto H, Daltroy L et al. Techniques to improve physicians' use of diagnostic tests. A new conceptual framework. JAMA 1998; 280: 2020-2027.
10. Etter JF, Perneger TV. Health care expenditures after introduction of a gatekeeper and a global budget in a Swiss health insurance plan. J Epidemiol Commun Health 1998; 52: 370-376.
11. Helgesen F, Andersson SO, Gustafsson O et al. Follow-up of prostate cancer patients by on-demand contacts with a specialist nurse: a randomized study. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2000; 34: 55-61.
12. Larsson A, Biom S, Wernroth ML et al. Effects of an education programme to change clinical laboratory testing habits in primary care. Scand J Prim Health Care 1999; 17: 238-243.
13. Wensing M, Grol R. Single and combined strategies for implementing changes in primary care: A literature review. Int J Health Care 1994; 6: 115-1132.
14. Wensing M, Van der Weijden T, Grol R. Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective? Br J Gen Pract 1998; 48: 991-997.
15. Thomson O'Brien MA, Oxman AD, Davis DA et al. Audit and feedback versus alternative strategies: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Libr 2000; 2: CD000260.
16. Mittman B, Tonesk X, Jacobson P. Implementing clinical practice guidelines: social influence strategies and practitioner behavior change. Qual Rev Bull 1992; 18: 413-422.
17. Grol R. Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care 2001; 39: 46-54.
18. Verstappen WH, van der Weijden T, Sijbrandij J et al. Effect of a practice-based strategy on test ordering performance of primary care physicians: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003; 289: 2407-2412.
19. Little P, Cantrell T, Roberts L et al. Why do GPs perform investigations? The medical and social agendas in arranging back X-rays. Fam Pract 1998; 15: 264-265.
20. McDonald IG, Daly J, Jelinek VM et al. Opening Pandora's box: the unpredictability of reassurance by a normal test result. Br Med J 1996; 313: 329-332.
21. Winkens RA, Grol RP, Beusmans GH et al. Does a reduction in general practitioners' use of diagnostic tests lead to more hospital referrals? Br J Gen Pract 1995; 45: 289-292.
22. Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, Van Hout BA et al. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Econ 1997; 6: 217-227.
23. Tausch BD, Harter MC. Perceived effectiveness of diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines in primary care quality circles. Int J Qual Health Care 2001; 13: 239-246.
24. Spooner A, Chapple A, Roland M. What makes British general practitioners take part in a quality improvement scheme? J Health Serv Res Pol 2001; 6: 145-150.
25. Brown CA, Belfield CR, Field SJ. Cost effectiveness of continuing professional development in health care: a critical review of the evidence. Br Med J 2002; 324: 652-655.
26. Mason J, Freemantle N, Nazareth I et al. When is it cost-effective to change the behavior of health professionals? JAMA 2001; 286: 2988-2992.