What factors are associated with the integration of evidence retrieval technology into routine general practice settings? Providing a web-based online medical record with electronic communication capabilities to patients with congestive heart failure: randomized trial. Patient-based outcome results from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice. Can computer-generated evidence-based care suggestions enhance evidence-based management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? A randomized, controlled trial. Reporting the study populations of clinical trials. Clear transmission or static on the line? Effect of a triage-based E-mail system on clinic resource use and patient and physician satisfaction in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. The tools of an evidence-based culture: implementing clinical-practice guidelines in an Israeli HMO. An Internet-based patient-provider communication system: randomized controlled trial.
Information retrieval systems have the potential to improve patient care but little is known about the variables which influence clinicians' uptake and use of systems in routine work.
                To determine which factors influenced use of an online evidence retrieval system.
                Computer logs and pre- and post-system survey analysis of a 4-week clinical trial of the Quick Clinical online evidence system involving 227 general practitioners across Australia.
                Online evidence use was not linked to general practice training or clinical experience but female clinicians conducted more searches than their male counterparts (mean use=14.38 searches, S.D.=11.68 versus mean use=8.50 searches, S.D.=9.99; t=2.67, d.f.=157, P=0.008). Practice characteristics such as hours worked, type and geographic location of clinic were not associated with search activity. Information seeking was also not related to participants' perceived information needs, computer skills, training nor Internet connection speed. Clinicians who reported direct improvements in patient care as a result of system use had significantly higher rates of system use than other users (mean use=12.55 searches, S.D.=13.18 versus mean use=8.15 searches, S.D.=9.18; t=2.322, d.f.=154 P=0.022). Comparison of participants' views pre- and post- the trial, showed that post-trial clinicians expressed more positive views about searching for information during a consultation (chi(2)=27.40, d.f.=4, P< or =0.001) and a significantly greater number reported seeking information between consultations as a result of having access to an online evidence system in their consulting rooms (chi(2)=9.818, d.f.=2, P=0.010).
                Clinicians' use of an online evidence system was directly related to their reported experiences of improvements in patient care. Post-trial clinicians positively changed their views about having time to search for information and pursued more questions during clinic hours. It is possible to provide patients with secure access to their medical records using the Internet. Such access may assist patients in the self-management of chronic diseases such as heart failure.
                To assess how a patient-accessible online medical record affects patient care and clinic operations. The SPPARO (System Providing Access to Records Online) software consisted of a web-based electronic medical record, an educational guide, and a messaging system enabling electronic communication between the patient and staff.
                A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a specialty practice for patients with heart failure. Surveys assessing doctor-patient communication, adherence, and health status were conducted at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year. Use of the system, message volume, utilization of clinical services, and mortality were monitored.
                One hundred and seven patients were enrolled (54 intervention and 53 controls). At 12 months, the intervention group was not found to be superior in self-efficacy (KCCQ self-efficacy score 91 vs. 85, p=0.08), but was superior in general adherence (MOS compliance score 85 vs. 78, p=0.01). A trend was observed for better satisfaction with doctor-patient communication. The intervention group had more emergency department visits (20 vs. 8, p=0.03), but these visits were not temporally related to use of the online medical record. There were no adverse effects from use of the system.
                Providing patients with congestive heart failure access to an online medical record was feasible and improved adherence. An effect on health status could not be demonstrated in this pilot study. Shared decision-making (SDM) between professionals and patients is increasingly advocated from ethical principles. Some data are accruing about the effects of such approaches on health or other patient-based outcomes. These effects often vary substantially between studies.
                Our aim was to evaluate the effects of training GPs in SDM, and the use of simple risk communication aids in general practice, on patient-based outcomes.
                A cluster randomized trial with crossover was carried out with the participation of 20 recently qualified GPs in urban and rural general practices in Gwent, South Wales. A total of 747 patients with known atrial fibrillation, prostatism, menorrhagia or menopausal symptoms were invited to a consultation to review their condition or treatments. After baseline, participating doctors were randomized to receive training in (i) SDM skills; or (ii) the use of simple risk communication aids, using simulated patients. The alternative training was then provided for the final study phase. Patients were randomly allocated to a consultation during baseline or intervention 1 (SDM or risk communication aids) or intervention 2 phases. A randomly selected half of the consultations took place in 'research clinics' to evaluate the effects of more time for consultations, compared with usual surgery time. Patient-based outcomes were assessed at exit from consultation and 1 month follow-up. These were: COMRADE instrument (principal measures; subscales of risk communication and confidence in decision), and a range of secondary measures (anxiety, patient enablement, intention to adhere to chosen treatment, satisfaction with decision, support in decision making and SF-12 health status measure). Multilevel modelling was carried out with outcome score as the dependent variable, and follow-up point (i.e. exit or 1 month later for each patient), patient and doctor levels of explanatory variables.
                No statistically significant changes in patient-based outcomes due to the training interventions were found: COMRADE risk communication score increased 0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to 2.32] after risk communication training and 0.9 (95% CI -0.89 to 2.35) after SDM training; and COMRADE satisfaction with communication score increased by 1.0 (95% CI -1.1 to 3.1) after risk communication, and decreased by 0.6 (95% CI 2.7 to -1.5) after SDM training. Patients' confidence in the decision (2.1 increase, 95% CI 0.7-3.5, P < 0.01) and expectation to adhere to chosen treatments (0.7 increase, 95% CI 0.04-1.36, P < 0.05) were significantly greater among patients seen in the research clinics (when more time was available) compared with usual surgery time. Most outcomes deteriorated between exit and 1 month later. There was no interaction between intervention effects.
                Patients can be more involved in treatment decisions, and risks and benefits of treatment options can be explained in more detail, without adversely affecting patient-based outcomes. SDM and risk communication may be advocated from values and ethical principles even without evidence of health gain or improvement in patient-based outcomes, but the resources required to enhance these professional skills must also be taken into consideration. These data also indicate the benefits of extra consultation time. Translation of evidence-based guidelines into clinical practice has been inconsistent. We performed a randomized, controlled trial of guideline-based care suggestions delivered to physicians when writing orders on computer workstations.
                Inner-city academic general internal medicine practice.
                Randomized, controlled trial of 246 physicians (25 percent faculty general internists, 75 percent internal medicine residents) and 20 outpatient pharmacists. We enrolled 706 of their primary care patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Care suggestions concerning drugs and monitoring were delivered to a random half of the physicians and pharmacists when writing orders or filling prescriptions using computer workstations. A 2 x 2 factorial randomization of practice sessions and pharmacists resulted in four groups of patients: physician intervention, pharmacist intervention, both interventions, and controls. DATA EXTRACTION/COLLECTION METHODS: Adherence to the guidelines and clinical activity was assessed using patients' electronic medical records. Health-related quality of life, medication adherence, and satisfaction with care were assessed using telephone questionnaires.
                During their year in the study, patients made an average of five scheduled primary care visits. There were no differences between groups in adherence to the care suggestions, generic or condition-specific quality of life, satisfaction with physicians or pharmacists, medication compliance, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations. Physicians receiving the intervention had significantly higher total health care costs. Physician attitudes toward guidelines were mixed.
                Care suggestions shown to physicians and pharmacists on computer workstations had no effect on the delivery or outcomes of care for patients with reactive airways disease. In contrast to attempts that have been made to measure the clarity of reporting of the methods of clinical trials in journal articles, we report here an attempt to measure the accuracy of methods reporting. We focus in this article on eligibility criteria as a test case for the reporting of clinical trial methods. We examined the reporting of eligibility criteria in the protocol, methods paper (if applicable), journal article, and Clinical Alert for articles appearing in print between January 1988 and September 1994 for which a Clinical Alert had been issued. Eligibility criteria were further classified into five categories in order to examine the content of information loss, if any. On average, 82% of protocol eligibility criteria were reported in methods papers. Journal articles and Clinical Alerts fared somewhat worse: 63% of criteria were reported in journal articles, 19% in Clinical Alerts. In all three categories of medical communication, the reporting of criteria that defined the study disease tended to be complete; reporting of criteria relating to trial precision, patient safety, legal and ethical concerns, and administrative considerations, was not complete. We found that criteria for clinical trial eligibility are frequently under-reported in medical communications. Moreover, some of the criteria omitted are of considerable clinical importance. We suggest that in the design phase of clinical trials, proposed eligibility criteria be scrutinized closely. Those criteria that survive this scrutiny and that have clinical import must be reported upon fully and accurately when communicating trial results. E-mail communication between patients and their providers has diffused slowly in clinical practice. To address concerns about the use of this technology, we performed a randomized controlled trial of a triage-based e-mail system in primary care. DESIGN AND PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Physicians in 2 university-affiliated primary care centers were randomized to a triage-based e-mail system promoted to their patients. E-mails from patients of intervention physicians were routed to a central account and parsed to the appropriate staff for response. Control group physicians and their patients did not have access to the system. We collected information on patient e-mail use, phone calls, and visit distribution by physician over the 10 months and performed physician and patient surveys to examine attitudes about communication.
                E-mail volume was greater for intervention versus control physicians (46 weekly e-mails per 100 scheduled visits vs 9 in the control group at the study midpoint; P <.01) but there were no between-group differences in phone volume (67 weekly phone calls per 100 scheduled visits vs 55 in the control group; P =.45) or rates of patient no-shows (5% in both groups; P =.77). Intervention physicians reported more favorable attitudes toward electronic communication than did control physicians but there were no differences in attitudes toward patient or staff communication in general. There were few between-group differences in patient attitudes toward electronic communication or communication in general.
                E-mail generated through a triage-based system did not appear to substitute for phone communication or to reduce visit no-shows in a primary care setting. Physicians' attitudes toward electronic communication were improved, but physicians' and patients' attitudes toward general communication did not change. Growth of e-mail communication in primary care settings may not improve the efficiency of clinical care. Although clinical-practice guidelines (CPGs) are implemented on the assumption that they will improve the quality, efficiency, and consistency of health care, they generally have limited effect in changing physicians' behavior. The purpose of this study was to design and implement an effective program for formulating, promulgating, and implementing CPGs to foster the development of an evidence-based culture in an Israeli HMO.
                The authors implemented a four-stage program of stepwise collaborative efforts with academic institutions composed of developing quantitative tools to evaluate prescribing patterns, updating CPGs, collecting MDs' input via focus groups and quantitative surveys, and conducting a randomized controlled trial of a two-stage, multipronged intervention. The test case for this study was the development, dissemination, and implementation of CPG for the treatment of acute uncomplicated cystitis in adult women. Interventions in the form of a lecture at a conference and a letter with personalized feedback were implemented, both individually and combined, to improve physicians' rates of prescribing the first-line drug, nitrofurantoin, and, in the absence of nitrofurantoin, adhering to the recommended duration of three days of treatment with ofloxacin.
                The tools and data-generating capabilities designed and constructed in Stage I of the project were integral components of all subsequent stages of the program. Personalized feedback alone was sufficient to improve the rate of adherence to the guidelines by 19.4% (95% CI = 16.7, 22.1).
                This study provides a template for introducing the component of experimentation essential for cultivating an evidence-based culture. This process, composed of collaborative efforts between academic institutions and a managed care organization, may be beneficial to other health care systems. Internet-based interactive websites for patient communication (patient portals) may improve communication between patients and their clinics and physicians.
                The aim of the study was to assess the impact of a patient portal on patients' satisfaction with access to their clinic and clinical care. Another aim was to analyze the content and volume of email messages and telephone calls from patients to their clinic.
                This was a randomized controlled trial with 606 patients from an academic internal medicine practice. The intervention "portal" group used a patient portal to send secure messages directly to their physicians and to request appointments, prescription refills, and referrals. The control group received usual care. We assessed patient satisfaction at the end of the 6-month trial period and compared the content of telephone and portal communications.
                Portal group patients reported improved communication with the clinic (portal: 77/174 [44%] "a little better" or "a lot better;" control: 18/146 [12%]; chi2 = 38.8, df = 1, P < .001) and higher satisfaction with overall care (portal: 103/174 [59%] "very good" or "excellent;" control: 78/162 [48%]; chi2 = 4.1, df = 1, P = .04). Portal group patients also reported higher satisfaction with each of the portal's services. Physicians received 1 portal message per day for every 250 portal patients. Total telephone call volume was not affected. Patients were more likely to send informational and psychosocial messages by portal than by phone. Of all surveyed patients, 162/341 (48%) were willing to pay for online correspondence with their physician. Of those willing to pay, the median amount cited was 2 USD per message.
                Portal group patients demonstrated increased satisfaction with communication and overall care. Patients in the portal group particularly valued the portal's convenience, reduced communication barriers, and direct physician responses. More online messages from patients contained informational and psychosocial content compared to telephone calls, which may enhance the patient-physician relationship.
The evidence base was found to be limited with variable results and missing data, and therefore it was not possible to adequately assess the effect of email for clinical communication between patients/caregivers and healthcare professionals. Recommendations for clinical practice could not be made. Future research should ideally address the issue of missing data and methodological concerns by adhering to published reporting standards. The rapidly changing nature of technology should be taken into account when designing and conducting future studies and barriers to trial development and implementation should also be tackled. Potential outcomes of interest for future research include cost-effectiveness and health service resource use.