Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31412928›Full record

ReviewBMC medical education2019

Changing prescribing behaviours with educational outreach: an overview of evidence and practice.

Breanne E Kunstler, Alyse Lennox, Peter Bragge

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A description of sodium valproate, lamotrigine and levetiracetam consumption in the Western Cape public sector.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2022
    Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Breanne E KunstlerBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia. brea.kunstler@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0334-6918
Alyse LennoxBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Peter BraggeBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Monash University · AUSustainable Development Institute · US

Funding

Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, Medicines and Poisons Regulation Branch NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs), or family practitioners, are tasked with prescribing medications that can be harmful to the community if they are inappropriately prescribed or used (e.g. opioids). Educational programs, such as educational outreach (EO), are designed to change the behaviour of health professionals. The purpose of this study was to identify the efficacy of EO programs at changing the prescribing behaviour of GPs.

methodsThis study included an evidence and practice review, comprising a rapid review supplemented by interviews with people who are familiar with EO implementation for regulation purposes. Seven databases were searched using terms related to health professionals and prescribing. Systematic and narrative reviews published in English after 2007 were included. Non-statistical analysis was used to report intervention efficacy. Three government representatives participated in semi-structured interviews to aid in understanding the relevance of review findings to the Victorian context. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed for emerging themes.

resultsFourteen reviews were identified for the evidence review. Isolated (e.g. EO program delivered by itself) and multifaceted (e.g. EO program supplemented by other interventions) programs were found to change prescribing behaviours. However, limited evidence suggests that EO can successfully change prescribing behaviours specific to GPs. Isolated EO can successfully change health professional prescribing behaviours, although cheaper alternatives such as letters might be just as effective. Multifaceted EO can also successfully change health professional prescribing behaviours, especially in older adults, but it remains unclear as to what combination of interventions works best. Success factors for EO reported by government representatives included programs having practical rather than didactic foci; making EO compulsory; focussing EO on preventing adverse events; using monetary or professional development incentives; and in-person delivery.

conclusionsEducational outreach can successfully change prescribing behaviours but evidence specific to GPs is lacking. Key characteristics of EO that could optimise success include ensuring the EO program is tailored, involves practical learning and uses incentives that are meaningful to clinicians.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, ContinuingAttitude of Health PersonnelEvidence-Based PracticeGeneral PractitionersHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Professional AutonomyAcademic detailingEducationEducational outreachGeneral practiceHealthcareInappropriate prescribingPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID31412928
PMCPMC6693161
OpenAlexW2968622979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.