Optimizing Audit and Feedback for Primary Care

Coronary Artery Disease Clinical Trial

Official title: Cluster Randomized Trial of a Goal-Setting Intervention With Performance Feedback Reports Regarding Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease for Family Physicians in Ontario

Status Completed

Clinical Trial Summary

There remains a large gap between ideal and actual care provided to patients with chronic diseases. Performance feedback reports are often used as a foundation for quality improvement interventions. There have been hundreds of trials investigating the use of feedback reports; the important question to ask now is not whether performance feedback reports can help to improve quality of care, but how to optimize feedback interventions to accomplish that goal. The purpose of this study is to test whether a theory-based intervention added to feedback reports sent to primary care providers can result in improved outcomes for patients with chronic disease.

Clinical Trial Description

There remains a large gap between ideal and actual care provided to patients with chronic diseases such as type-2 diabetes (DM2) and coronary artery disease (CAD), making them a common focus for translational research. Quality improvement strategies such as audit and feedback, which can increase adoption and adherence to guidelines, may be a good choice for such problems. Audit and feedback is felt to be effective because it may overcome physicians' limited ability to accurately self-assess. A recent Cochrane review concluded that it may increase appropriate clinical practice by 5 to 10 percentage points. However, the authors noted great variability in the results of the trials. It is thought that optimal design and delivery of feedback will more consistently lead to improved results, but few studies have tested different designs of feedback. A more recent meta-analysis of feedback found that interventions incorporating theoretical principles from psychology in the design were more effective than intuitive feedback designs. The author of that study has urged the creation of more 'actionable' feedback. There is both theoretical and empirical reason to believe that feedback will be more effective if the recipients set goals and develop action plans.

A group of family physicians across Ontario have previously signed data sharing agreements with ICES allowing their electronic medical records to be audited. These physicians will be invited to participate in this trial. Participants will receive performance feedback reports summarizing the percentage of their DM2 and CAD patients who are meeting evidence-based targets for quality of care.

Participating physicians will be split into two groups at the level of their practice to reduce risk of contamination. Minimization software will be used to ensure balance at baseline in the primary outcomes between the intervention and control group. New potential participants that have signed data sharing agreements at ICES will be invited to join the trial for a maximum of six months after the first practices are allocated.

The intervention group will receive in addition to the feedback reports a theoretically informed worksheet meant to facilitate goal-setting and the development of action plans. This will occur every six months for two years. Outcomes will be analyzed after 24 months. ;

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor), Primary Purpose: Health Services Research

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Coronary Artery Disease
• Coronary Disease
• Diabetes Mellitus
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
• Myocardial Ischemia

• NCT number: NCT00996645
• Study type: Interventional
• Source: Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: July 2010
• Completion date: August 2012