Effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection and management of dementia in primary care: cluster randomised controlled study.

Murna Downs, Stephen Turner, Michelle Bryans, Jane Wilcock, John Keady, Enid Levin, Ronan O'Carroll, Kate Howie, Steve Iliffe
Author Information
  1. Murna Downs: Bradford Dementia Group, Division of Dementia Studies, School of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford BD5 0BB. m.downs@bradford.ac.uk

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection rates and management of dementia in primary care.
DESIGN: Unblinded, cluster randomised, before and after controlled study.
SETTING: General practices in the United Kingdom (central Scotland and London) between 1999 and 2002.
INTERVENTIONS: Three educational interventions: an electronic tutorial carried on a CD Rom; decision support software built into the electronic medical record; and practice based workshops.
PARTICIPANTS: 36 practices participated in the study. Eight practices were randomly assigned to the electronic tutorial; eight to decision support software; 10 to practice based workshops; and 10 to control. Electronic and manual searches yielded 450 valid and usable medical records.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of detection of dementia and the extent to which medical records showed evidence of improved concordance with guidelines regarding diagnosis and management.
RESULTS: Decision support software (P = 0.01) and practice based workshops (P = 0.01) both significantly improved rates of detection compared with control. There were no significant differences by intervention in the measures of concordance with guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: Decision support systems and practice based workshops are effective educational approaches in improving detection rates in dementia.

References

  1. J Public Health (Oxf). 2004 Mar;26(1):34-7 [PMID: 15044571]
  2. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1:6 [PMID: 11459516]
  3. BMJ. 1995 Dec 2;311(7018):1473-8 [PMID: 8520339]
  4. BMJ. 1998 Sep 19;317(7161):802-8 [PMID: 9740574]
  5. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1997 Dec;12(12):1143-5 [PMID: 9444536]
  6. Fam Pract. 2003 Aug;20(4):376-81 [PMID: 12876106]
  7. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Jul;51(468):575-9 [PMID: 11462321]
  8. Med J Aust. 1994 Jan 3;160(1):10-4 [PMID: 8271977]
  9. Methods Inf Med. 2002;41(2):98-104 [PMID: 12061130]
  10. Int J Epidemiol. 1991 Sep;20(3):736-48 [PMID: 1955260]
  11. Patient Educ Couns. 2000 Feb;39(2-3):219-25 [PMID: 11040721]
  12. BMJ. 2002 Oct 26;325(7370):941 [PMID: 12399345]
  13. BMJ. 2003 Feb 15;326(7385):394; author reply 394 [PMID: 12586680]
  14. Lancet. 2005 Dec 17;366(9503):2112-7 [PMID: 16360788]
  15. Fam Pract. 2004 Aug;21(4):396-412 [PMID: 15249528]
  16. Br J Psychiatry. 2002 Feb;180:135-9 [PMID: 11823323]
  17. Aging Ment Health. 2003 Jan;7(1):28-33 [PMID: 12554312]

MeSH Term

Aged
CD-ROM
Clinical Competence
Cluster Analysis
Computer-Assisted Instruction
Decision Support Techniques
Dementia
Education, Medical, Graduate
Family Practice
Humans
London
Scotland

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0detectioneducationaldementiasupportpracticebasedworkshopsimprovingratesmanagementstudypracticeselectronicsoftwaremedicalinterventionsprimaryclusterrandomisedcontrolledtutorialdecision10controlrecordsimprovedconcordanceguidelinesDecisionP=001OBJECTIVE:testeffectivenesscareDESIGN:UnblindedSETTING:GeneralUnitedKingdomcentralScotlandLondon19992002INTERVENTIONS:Threeinterventions:carriedCDRombuiltrecordPARTICIPANTS:36participatedEightrandomlyassignedeightElectronicmanualsearchesyielded450validusableMAINOUTCOMEMEASURES:RatesextentshowedevidenceregardingdiagnosisRESULTS:significantlycomparedsignificantdifferencesinterventionmeasuresCONCLUSIONS:systemseffectiveapproachesEffectivenesscare:

Similar Articles

Cited By