Trial reportAnnals of family medicine
Improving test ordering in primary care: the added value of a small-group quality improvement strategy compared with classic feedback only.
Trial report in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Practices to Support Appropriate Laboratory Test Utilization: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.American journal of clinical pathology · 2018Pooled it
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Implementation fidelity in a multifaceted program to foster rational antibiotics use in primary care: an observational study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Trial
- Effect of audit and feedback with peer review on general practitioners' prescribing and test ordering performance: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2017Trial
- Feedback GAP: pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial of goal setting and action plans to increase the effectiveness of audit and feedback interventions in primary care.Implementation science : IS · 2013Trial
- Canadian Quality Circle pilot project in osteoporosis: rationale, methods, and feasibility.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2007Trial
- Improving ondansetron use and oral rehydration instructions for pediatric acute gastroenteritis.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Effect of a price display intervention on laboratory test ordering behavior of general practitioners.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Use of quality circles for primary care providers in 24 European countries: an online survey of European Society for Quality and Safety in family practice delegates.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Article
- Explaining variations in test ordering in primary care: protocol for a realist review.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Quality circles for quality improvement in primary health care: Their origins, spread, effectiveness and lacunae- A scoping review.PloS one · 2018Article
- Exploring why quality circles work in primary health care: a realist review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2013Article
- Temporal growth and geographic variation in the use of laboratory tests by NHS general practices: using routine data to identify research priorities.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013Article
- A cluster randomized controlled trial aimed at implementation of local quality improvement collaboratives to improve prescribing and test ordering performance of general practitioners: study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe wanted to evaluate the added value of small peer-group quality improvement meetings compared with simple feedback as a strategy to improve test-ordering behavior. Numbers of tests ordered by primary care physicians are increasing, and many of these tests seem to be unnecessary according to established, evidence-based guidelines.
methodsWe enrolled 194 primary care physicians from 27 local primary care practice groups in 5 health care regions (5 diagnostic centers). The study was a cluster randomized trial with randomization at the local physician group level. We evaluated an innovative, multifaceted strategy, combining written comparative feedback, group education on national guidelines, and social influence by peers in quality improvement sessions in small groups. The strategy was aimed at 3 specific clinical topics: cardiovascular issues, upper abdominal complaints, and lower abdominal complaints. The mean number of tests per physician per 6 months at baseline and the physicians' region were used as independent variables, and the mean number of tests per physician per 6 months was the dependent variable.
resultsThe new strategy was executed in 13 primary care groups, whereas 14 groups received feedback only. For all 3 clinical topics, the decrease in mean total number of tests ordered by physicians in the intervention arm was far more substantial (on average 51 fewer tests per physician per half-year) than the decrease in mean number of tests ordered by physicians in the feedback arm (P = .005). Five tests considered to be inappropriate for the clinical problem of upper abdominal complaints decreased in the intervention arm, with physicians in the feedback arm ordering 13 more tests per 6 months (P = .002). Interdoctor variation in test ordering decreased more in the intervention arm.
conclusionCompared with only disseminating comparative feedback reports to primary care physicians, the new strategy of involving peer interaction and social influence improved the physicians' test-ordering behavior. To be effective, feedback needs to be integrated in an interactive, educational environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.