65275
document
Evidence-based narratives to improve recall of opioid prescribing guidelines : a randomized experiment . OBJECTIVES Physicians adopt evidence-based guidelines with variable consistency . Narratives , or stories , offer a novel dissemination strategy for clinical recommendations . The study objective was to compare whether evidence-based narrative versus traditional summary improved recall of opioid prescribing guidelines from the American College of Emergency Physicians ( ACEP ) . METHODS This was a prospective , randomized controlled experiment to compare whether narrative versus summary promoted short-term recall of six themes contained in the ACEP opioid guideline . The experiment was modeled after the free-recall test , an established technique in studies of memory . At a regional conference , emergency physicians ( EPs ) were randomized to read either a summary of the guideline ( control ) or a narrative ( intervention ) . The fictional narrative was constructed to match the summary in content and length . One hour after reading the text , participants listed all content that they could recall . Two reviewers independently scored the responses to assess recall of the six themes . The primary outcome was the total number of themes recalled per participant . Secondary outcomes included the proportion of responses in each study arm that recalled individual themes and the proportion of responses in each arm that contained falsely recalled or extraneous information . RESULTS Ninety-five physicians were randomized . Eighty-two physicians completed the experiment , for a response rate of 86 % . The mean of the total number of themes recalled per participant was 3.1 in the narrative arm versus 2.0 in the summary arm ( difference = 1.1 , 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] = 0.6 to 1.7 ) . For three themes , the proportion of responses that recalled the theme was significantly greater in the narrative arm compared to the summary arm , with the differences ranging from 20 % to 51 % . For one theme , recall was significantly greater in the summary arm . For two themes , there was no statistically significant difference in recall between the arms . In the summary arm , 54 % of responses were found to contain falsely recalled or extraneous information versus 21 % of responses in the narrative arm ( difference = 33 % , 95 % CI = 14 % to 53 % ) . CONCLUSIONS Physicians exposed to a narrative about opioid guidelines were more likely to recall guideline content at 1 hour than those exposed to a summary of the guidelines . Future studies should examine whether the incorporation of narratives in dissemination campaigns improves guideline adoption and changes clinical practice
65276
Intervention_Educational
Evidence-based narratives
65277
Intervention_Educational
evidence-based narrative
65278
Intervention_Educational
traditional summary
65279
Intervention_Educational
narrative
65280
Intervention_Educational
summary
65281
Intervention_Educational
read either a summary of the guideline ( control ) or a narrative ( intervention )
65282
Intervention_Educational
opioid guidelines
65283
Outcome_Mental
recall
65284
Outcome_Mental
assess recall
65285
Outcome_Mental
total number of themes recalled per participant
65286
Outcome_Mental
proportion of responses
65287
Outcome_Mental
recalled individual
65288
Outcome_Mental
falsely recalled or extraneous information
65289
Outcome_Mental
mean of the total number of themes recalled
65290
Outcome_Mental
proportion of responses
65291
Outcome_Mental
recall
65292
Outcome_Mental
recall
65293
Outcome_Mental
falsely recalled or extraneous information
65294
Participant_Sample-size
Ninety-five
65295
Participant_Sample-size
Eighty-two