Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Family Practice and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Implementing referral guidelines: lessons from a negative outcome cluster randomised factorial trial in general practice

Moyez Jiwa1*, Paul Skinner2, Akinoso Olujimi Coker3, Lindsey Shaw4, Michael J Campbell4 and Joanne Thompson4

Author Affiliations

1 Professor of Primary Care, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia

2 Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK

3 Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Doncaster, UK

4 Institute of General Practice, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Family Practice 2006, 7:65  doi:10.1186/1471-2296-7-65

Published: 2 November 2006

Abstract

Background

Few patients with lower bowel symptoms who consult their general practitioner need a specialist opinion. However data from referred patients suggest that those who are referred would benefit from detailed assessment before referral.

Methods

A cluster randomised factorial trial. 44 general practices in North Trent, UK. Practices were offered either an electronic interactive referral pro forma, an educational outreach visit by a local colorectal surgeon, both or neither. The main outcome measure was the proportion of cases with severe diverticular disease, cancer or precancerous lesions and inflammatory bowel disease in those referred by each group. A secondary outcome was a referral letter quality score. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify key themes relating to the use of the software

Results

From 150 invitations, 44 practices were recruited with a total list size of 265,707. There were 716 consecutive referrals recorded over a six-month period, for which a diagnosis was available for 514. In the combined software arms 14% (37/261) had significant pathology, compared with 19% (49/253) in the non-software arms, relative risk 0.73 (95% CI: 0.46 to 1.15). In the combined educational outreach arms 15% (38/258) had significant pathology compared with 19% (48/256) in the non-educational arms, relative risk 0.79 (95% CI: 0.50 to 1.24). Pro forma practices documented better assessment of patients at referral.

Conclusion

There was a lack of evidence that either intervention increased the proportion of patients with organic pathology among those referred. The interactive software did improve the amount of information relayed in referral letters although we were unable to confirm if this made a significant difference to patients or their health care providers. The potential value of either intervention may have been diminished by their limited uptake within the context of a cluster randomised clinical trial. A number of lessons were learned in this trial of novel innovations.