Colquhoun, H; Michie, S; Sales, A; Ivers, N; Grimshaw, JM; Carroll, K; Chalifoux, M; ... Brehaut, J; + view all Colquhoun, H; Michie, S; Sales, A; Ivers, N; Grimshaw, JM; Carroll, K; Chalifoux, M; Eva, K; Brehaut, J; - view fewer (2017) Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: a secondary review. BMJ Quality & Safety , 26 (1) pp. 54-60. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005004.

Preview

Text Michie-S__Practice feedback__bmjqs-2015-005004 Dec 18 2015 Clean Copy (2).pdf Download (286kB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A&F) is a frequently used intervention aiming to support implementation of research evidence into clinical practice with positive, yet variable, effects. Our understanding of effective A&F has been limited by poor reporting and intervention heterogeneity. Our objective was to describe the extent of these issues. METHODS: Using a secondary review of A&F interventions and a consensus-based process to identify modifiable A&F elements, we examined intervention descriptions in 140 trials of A&F to quantify reporting limitations and describe the interventions. RESULTS: We identified 17 modifiable A&F intervention elements; 14 were examined to quantify reporting limitations and all 17 were used to describe the interventions. Clear reporting of the elements ranged from 56% to 97% with a median of 89%. There was considerable variation in A&F interventions with 51% for individual providers only, 92% targeting behaviour change and 79% targeting processes of care, 64% performed by the provider group and 81% reporting aggregate patient data. CONCLUSIONS: Our process identified 17 A&F design elements, demonstrated gaps in reporting and helped understand the degree of variation in A&F interventions.

Download activity - last month

Export as JSONXMLCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Archive Staff Only

View Item