General practitioners’ preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence

M. Lugtenberg, J.S. Burgers, G.P. Westert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Rationale, aims and objectives
Interventions aimed at improving guideline adherence should take into account the specific features of the target users; however, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the different types of interventions. The aim of this paper was to identify GPs' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence in practice and whether these differ across key guideline recommendations.
Method
An electronic survey was conducted among 703 GPs working in the south-western part of the Netherlands. Each survey focused on two of four guidelines: cerebrovascular accident, eye inflammation, thyroid disorders and urinary tract infection. GPs were asked to rate potential interventions in terms of their usefulness in improving guideline adherence in general and for specific key guideline recommendations.
Results
264 GPs (38%) completed the questionnaire. In general, GPs preferred interactive small group meetings (84% rated this as much or very much encouraging), audit and feedback (53%), organizational interventions (50%) and the use of local opinion leaders (50%) as methods for improving guideline adherence. Financial interventions (24%), distribution of educational materials (22%) and big group educational meetings (21%) were of least interest. Some interventions were preferred by GPs irrespective of the specific key recommendations (e.g. audit and feedback), while ratings for other interventions differed across key recommendations (reminders/computer support).
Conclusions
To implement guidelines, interventions need to be identified that are acceptable and appealing to the target group. GPs seem to have general and recommendation-specific preferences regarding interventions, these should be taken into account when developing plans for guideline implementation to encourage the uptake of guidelines in practice.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)820-826
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume20
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Guideline Adherence
General Practitioners
Practice Guidelines
Netherlands

Cite this

Lugtenberg, M. ; Burgers, J.S. ; Westert, G.P. / General practitioners’ preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence. In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2014 ; Vol. 20, No. 6. pp. 820-826.
@article{a4269d3592694ed9a8e4acc4ad3c57fe,
title = "General practitioners’ preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence",
abstract = "Rationale, aims and objectivesInterventions aimed at improving guideline adherence should take into account the specific features of the target users; however, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the different types of interventions. The aim of this paper was to identify GPs' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence in practice and whether these differ across key guideline recommendations.MethodAn electronic survey was conducted among 703 GPs working in the south-western part of the Netherlands. Each survey focused on two of four guidelines: cerebrovascular accident, eye inflammation, thyroid disorders and urinary tract infection. GPs were asked to rate potential interventions in terms of their usefulness in improving guideline adherence in general and for specific key guideline recommendations.Results264 GPs (38{\%}) completed the questionnaire. In general, GPs preferred interactive small group meetings (84{\%} rated this as much or very much encouraging), audit and feedback (53{\%}), organizational interventions (50{\%}) and the use of local opinion leaders (50{\%}) as methods for improving guideline adherence. Financial interventions (24{\%}), distribution of educational materials (22{\%}) and big group educational meetings (21{\%}) were of least interest. Some interventions were preferred by GPs irrespective of the specific key recommendations (e.g. audit and feedback), while ratings for other interventions differed across key recommendations (reminders/computer support).ConclusionsTo implement guidelines, interventions need to be identified that are acceptable and appealing to the target group. GPs seem to have general and recommendation-specific preferences regarding interventions, these should be taken into account when developing plans for guideline implementation to encourage the uptake of guidelines in practice.",
author = "M. Lugtenberg and J.S. Burgers and G.P. Westert",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1111/jep.12209",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "820--826",
journal = "Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice",
issn = "1356-1294",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

General practitioners’ preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence. / Lugtenberg, M.; Burgers, J.S.; Westert, G.P.

In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 20, No. 6, 2014, p. 820-826.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - General practitioners’ preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence

AU - Lugtenberg, M.

AU - Burgers, J.S.

AU - Westert, G.P.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Rationale, aims and objectivesInterventions aimed at improving guideline adherence should take into account the specific features of the target users; however, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the different types of interventions. The aim of this paper was to identify GPs' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence in practice and whether these differ across key guideline recommendations.MethodAn electronic survey was conducted among 703 GPs working in the south-western part of the Netherlands. Each survey focused on two of four guidelines: cerebrovascular accident, eye inflammation, thyroid disorders and urinary tract infection. GPs were asked to rate potential interventions in terms of their usefulness in improving guideline adherence in general and for specific key guideline recommendations.Results264 GPs (38%) completed the questionnaire. In general, GPs preferred interactive small group meetings (84% rated this as much or very much encouraging), audit and feedback (53%), organizational interventions (50%) and the use of local opinion leaders (50%) as methods for improving guideline adherence. Financial interventions (24%), distribution of educational materials (22%) and big group educational meetings (21%) were of least interest. Some interventions were preferred by GPs irrespective of the specific key recommendations (e.g. audit and feedback), while ratings for other interventions differed across key recommendations (reminders/computer support).ConclusionsTo implement guidelines, interventions need to be identified that are acceptable and appealing to the target group. GPs seem to have general and recommendation-specific preferences regarding interventions, these should be taken into account when developing plans for guideline implementation to encourage the uptake of guidelines in practice.

AB - Rationale, aims and objectivesInterventions aimed at improving guideline adherence should take into account the specific features of the target users; however, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) evaluate the different types of interventions. The aim of this paper was to identify GPs' preferences for interventions to improve guideline adherence in practice and whether these differ across key guideline recommendations.MethodAn electronic survey was conducted among 703 GPs working in the south-western part of the Netherlands. Each survey focused on two of four guidelines: cerebrovascular accident, eye inflammation, thyroid disorders and urinary tract infection. GPs were asked to rate potential interventions in terms of their usefulness in improving guideline adherence in general and for specific key guideline recommendations.Results264 GPs (38%) completed the questionnaire. In general, GPs preferred interactive small group meetings (84% rated this as much or very much encouraging), audit and feedback (53%), organizational interventions (50%) and the use of local opinion leaders (50%) as methods for improving guideline adherence. Financial interventions (24%), distribution of educational materials (22%) and big group educational meetings (21%) were of least interest. Some interventions were preferred by GPs irrespective of the specific key recommendations (e.g. audit and feedback), while ratings for other interventions differed across key recommendations (reminders/computer support).ConclusionsTo implement guidelines, interventions need to be identified that are acceptable and appealing to the target group. GPs seem to have general and recommendation-specific preferences regarding interventions, these should be taken into account when developing plans for guideline implementation to encourage the uptake of guidelines in practice.

U2 - 10.1111/jep.12209

DO - 10.1111/jep.12209

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 820

EP - 826

JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

SN - 1356-1294

IS - 6

ER -