Trial reportAnnals of family medicine
Effect of e-learning and repeated performance feedback on spirometry test quality in family practice: a cluster trial.
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 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Offline Digital Education for Postregistration Health Professions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- E-learning for health professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Acute and training induced cardiopulmonary responses in short-, middle-, and long-distance female runners.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Effects of repetition as training and incentives on the performance in pulmonary function tests in healthy volunteers.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Article
- Effects of the Spirometry Learning Module on the knowledge, confidence, and experience of spirometry operators.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2019Article
- Changing cluster composition in cluster randomised controlled trials: design and analysis considerations.Trials · 2014Article
- Don't pay for poor quality spirometry tests.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2013Article
- Spirometry in primary care: an analysis of spirometery test quality in a regional primary care asthma program.Canadian respiratory journalArticle
- SPIROMETRY IN SCHOOLCHILDREN FOR FIELD STUDIES: DOES TESTING ON DIFFERENT DAYS CHANGE THE RESULT OF THE EXAM?Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao PauloArticle
- Article
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 at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSpirometry has become an indispensable tool in primary care to exclude, diagnose, and monitor chronic respiratory conditions, but the quality of spirometry tests in family practices is a reason for concern. Aim of this study was to investigate whether a combination of e-learning and bimonthly performance feedback would improve spirometry test quality in family practices in the course of 1 year.
methodsOur study was a cluster trial with 19 family practices allocated to intervention or control conditions through minimization. Intervention consisted of e-learning and bimonthly feedback reports to practice nurses. Control practices received only the joint baseline workshop. Spirometry quality was assessed by independent lung function technicians. Two outcomes were defined, with the difference between rates of tests with 2 acceptable and repeatable blows being the primary outcome and the difference between rates of tests with 2 acceptable blows being the secondary outcome. We used multilevel logistic regression analysis to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for an adequate test in intervention group practices.
resultsWe analyzed 1,135 tests. Rate of adequate tests was 33% in intervention and 30% in control group practices (OR = 1.3; P=.605). Adequacy of tests did not differ between groups but tended to increase with time: OR = 2.2 (P = .057) after 3 and OR = 2.0 (P = .086) in intervention group practices after 4 feedback reports. When ignoring test repeatability, these differences between the groups were slightly more pronounced: OR = 2.4 (P = .033) after 3 and OR=2.2 (P = .051) after 4 feedback reports.
conclusionsIn the course of 1 year, we observed a small and late effect of e-learning and repeated feedback on the quality of spirometry as performed by family practice nurses. This intervention does not seem to compensate the lack of rigorous training and experience in performing spirometry tests in most practices.
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.