One-to-one versus group sessions to improve prescription in primary care: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 educational strategies aimed at improving prescribing standards in primary care.
METHODS: A pragmatic controlled trial was designed; the study population included general and family practitioners in Galicia (northwestern Spain) divided into 3 study groups: a one-to-one education group (n = 98), a by-group education group (n = 92), and a control group (n = 405). The educational intervention included explicit recommendations for selecting nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for inflammation signs. Some of the subjects were given reminders. Mixed-effect linear models were applied to data analysis. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. The dependent variable is a rate with a numerator that is the number of prescribed units of the NSAIDs recommended during intervention; the denominator is the total number of prescribed units of the NSAID total.
RESULTS: One-to-one education obtained an average prescribing behavior improvement of 6.5% (P < 0.001) in the 9 months after intervention. In the education group, the average improvement was 2.4% (P < 0.05) for the same period. Statistically significant differences were observed between the group intervention and one-to-one groups. The reminder increased significantly the effectiveness of the one-to-one intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: A single, short educational session to primary care doctors can improve their prescribing standards during long periods of > or = 9 months. Of the 2 strategies followed in the trial, one-to-one education has shown to be the most effective. Results also show that the effectiveness of these interventions increases when presented together with written material.
Full Text Links
Find Full Text Links for this Article
You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.