...
首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Effects of two guideline implementation strategies on patient outcomes in primary care: a cluster randomized controlled trial.
【24h】

Effects of two guideline implementation strategies on patient outcomes in primary care: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

机译:两项指南实施策略对基层医疗患者预后的影响:一项随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

STUDY DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To improve quality of care for patients with low back pain (LBP) a multifaceted general practitioner education alone and in combination with motivational counseling by practice nurses has been implemented in German general practices. We studied effects on functional capacity (main outcome), days in pain, physical activity, quality of life, or days of sick leave (secondary outcomes) compared with no intervention. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: International research has lead to the development of the German LBP guideline for general practitioners. However, there is still doubt about the most effective implementation strategy. Although effects on process of care have been observed frequently, changes in patient outcomes are rarely seen. METHODS: We recruited 1378 patients with LBP in 118 general practices, which were randomized to 1 of 3 study arms: a multifaceted guideline implementation (GI), GI plus training of practice nurses in motivational counseling (MC), and the postal dissemination of the guideline (controls, C). Data were collected (questionnaires and patient interviews) at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. Multilevel mixed effects modeling was used to adjust for clustering of data and potential confounders. RESULTS: After 6 months, functional capacity was higher in the intervention groups with a cluster adjusted mean difference of 3.650 between the MC group and controls (95% CI = 0.320-6.979, P = 0.032) and 2.652 between the GI group and controls (95% CI = -0.704 to 6.007, P = 0.120). Intervention effects were more pronounced regarding days in pain per year with an average reduction of 16 (GI) to 17 days (MC) after 6 months (12 and 9 days after 12 months) compared with controls. CONCLUSION: Active implementation of the German LBP guideline results in slightly better outcomes during 6 months follow-up than its postal dissemination. Results are more distinct when practice nurses are trained in motivational counseling.
机译:研究设计:集群随机对照试验。目的:为提高下腰痛(LBP)患者的护理质量,德国的全科医师已实施了多方面的全科医生教育,并结合了执业护士的动机咨询。与没有干预相比,我们研究了对功能能力(主要结局),痛苦天数,身体活动,生活质量或病假天数(次要结局)的影响。背景数据摘要:国际研究已导致制定了针对全科医生的德国LBP指南。但是,对于最有效的实施策略仍然存在疑问。尽管经常观察到对护理过程的影响,但患者预后的变化却很少见。方法:我们招募了1378名LBP患者,接受118种常规治疗,随机分为3个研究组中的1个:多方面的指南实施(GI),GI以及对实践护士进行动机咨询培训(MC)以及邮政的邮政传播准则(控件,C)。在基线以及6个月和12个月后收集数据(问卷调查和患者访谈)。多级混合效果建模用于调整数据和潜在混杂因素的聚类。结果:6个月后,干预组的功能能力更高,MC组与对照组之间的群集调整后平均差异为3.650(95%CI = 0.320-6.979,P = 0.032),而GI组与对照组之间的差异为2.652( 95%CI = -0.704至6.007,P = 0.120)。与对照组相比,干预的效果在每年的疼痛天数上更为明显,在6个月后(12个月后12和9天)平均减少了16(GI)到17天(MC)。结论:德国LBP指南的积极实施导致6个月的随访结果比邮政的传播略好。当对实践护士进行动机咨询培训时,结果会更加明显。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号