Empowering patients or general practitioners? A randomised clinical trial to improve quality in reproductive health care in Belgium

European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 280-289

  Peremans, Lieve ^a,b   Rethans, Jan Joost ^c   Verhoeven, Veronique ^a   Coenen, Samuel ^a   Debaene, Luc ^a   Meulemans, Herman ^a   Denekens, Joke ^a   Van Royen, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^b VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL   (Belgium)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Adolescents; Computer decision support; Consultation; Contraception; Empowered patient; Standardised patient

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BELGIUM; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONSULTATION; CONTRACEPTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MALE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BELGIUM; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; FEMALE; HEALTH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; POWER (PSYCHOLOGY); PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES;

EID: 77956299379     PISSN: 13625187     EISSN: 14730782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/13625187.2010.492882     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Little P, Griffin S, Kelly J, et al. Effect of educational leaflets and questions on knowledge of contraception in women taking the combined contraceptive pill: Randomised controlled trial. BMJ 1998;316:1948-1952
2. Bromham DR, Cartmill RSV. Knowledge and use of secondary contraception among patients requesting termination of pregnancy. BMJ 1993;306:556-557
3. Wilson S, Taylor R. Women's knowledge about contraception. Br J Fam Plann 1992;18:3-5.
4. Churchill D, Allen J, Pringle M, et al. Consultation patterns and provision of contraception in general practice before teenage pregnancy: Case-control study. BMJ 2000;321:486-489
5. Peremans L, Hermann I AD, Van Royen P, Denekens J. Contraceptive knowledge and expectations by adolescents: An explanation by focus groups. Patient Educ Counsel 2000;40:133-141
6. Jacobson LD, Mellanby A, Donovan C, et al. Teenagers' view on general practice consultations and other medical advice. Fam Pract 2000;17:156-158
7. Rethans JJ, Westin S, Hays R. Methods for quality assessment in general practice. Fam Pract 1996;13: 468-476
8. Barrows H. An overview of the uses of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. Acad Med 1993;68:443-451
9. Van der Vleuten C, Swanson D. Assessment of clinical skills with standardized patients: state of the art. Teach Learn Med 1990;2:1958-1976
10. Norman G, Tugwell P, Feightner J. A comparison of resident performance on real and simulated patients. J Med Educ 1982;57:708-715
11. Hermida J, Nicholas DD, Blumenfeld SN. Comparative validity of three methods for assessment of the quality of primary health care. Int J Qual Health Care 1999;11: 429-433
12. Peremans L, Rethans JJ, Verhoeven V, et al. Adolescents demanding a good contraceptive: A study with standardized patients in general practices. Contraception 2005;71:421-425
13. Peremans L, Michels J, Van Royen P, Van Peer W. Aanbeveling voor goede medische praktijkvoering: Orale anticonceptie. [Recommendation for good medical practice: Oral contraception.] Huisarts Nu 2002;31:163-182 (In Dutch.).
14. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:1-94.
15. Johnston ME, Langton KB, Haynes RB, Mathieu A. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. Ann Int Med 1994;120:135-142
16. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes. JAMA 1998;280:1339-1346
17. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patient's care. Lancet 2003;362:1225-1230
18. Wang D, Peleg M, Samson WT, et al. Representation primitives, process models and patient data in computerinterpretable clinical practice guidelines: A literature review of guideline representation models. Int J Med Informatics 2002;68:59-70.
19. Walton R, Dovey S, Harvey E, Freemantle N. Computer support for determining drug dose: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 1999;318:984-990
20. Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE. Expanding patient involvement in health care: effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med 1985;102:520-528
21. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Ottawa: Canadian Public Health Association, 1986.
22. World Health Organisation Alma Ata Declaration 1978. Kopenhagen. Accessed 27 November 2009 from:
23. Edwards M, Davies M, Edwards A. What are the external influences on information exchange and shared decisionmaking in healthcare consultations: A meta-synthesis of the literature. Patient Educ Counseling 2009;75:37-52.
24. Wind AL, Van Dalen J, Muitjens AMM, Rethans JJ. Assessing simulated patients in an educational setting: the MaSP (Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients). Med Educ 2004;38:39-44.
25. Rethans JJ, Drop R, Sturmans F, van der Vleuten C. A method for introducing standardized (simulated) patients into general practice consultations. Br J Gen Pract 1991;41:94-96
26. Free C, Lee RM, Ogden J. Young women's accounts of factors influencing their use and non-use of emergency contraception: In-depth interview study. BMJ 2002;325:1393-1397
27. Jackson R, Schwarz E, Freedman L. Advance supply of emergency contraception: Effect on use and usual contraception - A randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:8-16.
28. Grimshaw J, Russell IT. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: A systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet 1993;342:1317-1322
29. Bryan C, Boren SA. The use and effectiveness of electronic clinical decision support tools in the ambulatory/ primary care setting: a systematic review of the literature. Inform Prim Care 2008;16:79-91.
30. Smith GD, Mertens T. What's said and what's done: The reality of sexually transmitted disease consultations. Public Health 2004;118:96-103.
31. Rousseau N, McColl E, Newton J, et al. Practice based longitudinal, qualitative interview study of computerized evidence based guidelines in primary care. BMJ 2003;326:314.
32. Eccles M, McColl E, Steen N, et al. Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: Cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2002;325: 941.
33. Roberts KJ. Patient empowerment in the United States: A critical commentary. Health Expectations 1999;2: 82-92.
34. Chewning B, Mosena P, Wilson D, et al. Evaluation of a computerized decision aid for adolescent patients. Patient Educ Counseling 1999;38:227-239
35. Watkins C, Harvey I, Carthy P, et al. Attitudes and behaviour of general practitioners and their prescribing costs: A national cross sectional survey. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:29-34.
36. Muijers PEM, Grol R, Sijbrandij J, et al. Differences in prescribing between GPs. Impact of the cooperation with pharmacists and impact of visits from pharmaceutical industry representatives. Fam Pract 2005;22: 624-630