Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses

BackgroundAudit and feedback (A&F) is a common strategy for helping health providers to implement evidence into practice. Despite being extensively studied, health care A&F interventions remain variably effective, with overall effect sizes that have not improved since 2003. Contributing to this stagnation is the fact that most health care A&F interventions have largely been designed without being informed by theoretical understanding from the behavioral and social sciences. To determine if the trend can be improved, the objective of this study was to develop a list of testable, theory-informed hypotheses about how to design more effective A&F interventions.MethodsUsing purposive sampling, semi-structured 60–90-min telephone interviews were conducted with experts in theories related to A&F from a range of fields (e.g., cognitive, health and organizational psychology, medical decision-making, economics). Guided by detailed descriptions of A&F interventions from the health care literature, interviewees described how they would approach the problem of designing improved A&F interventions. Specific, theory-informed hypotheses about the conditions for effective design and delivery of A&F interventions were elicited from the interviews. The resulting hypotheses were assigned by three coders working independently into themes, and categories of themes, in an iterative process.ResultsWe conducted 28 interviews and identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, which were placed into 30 themes. The 30 themes included hypotheses related to the following five categories: A&F recipient (seven themes), content of the A&F (ten themes), process of delivery of the A&F (six themes), behavior that was the focus of the A&F (three themes), and other (four themes).ConclusionsWe have identified a set of testable, theory-informed hypotheses from a broad range of behavioral and social science that suggest conditions for more effective A&F interventions.This work demonstrates the breadth of perspectives about A&F from non-healthcare-specific disciplines in a way that yields testable hypotheses for healthcare A&F interventions. These results will serve as the foundation for further work seeking to set research priorities among the A&F research community.

[1]  Jeremy M. Grimshaw,et al.  Practice Feedback Interventions: 15 Suggestions for Optimizing Effectiveness , 2016, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  E. A. Locke,et al.  A theory of goal setting & task performance , 1990 .

[3]  Susan Michie,et al.  Theories and techniques of behaviour change: Developing a cumulative science of behaviour change , 2012 .

[4]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. A 35-year odyssey. , 2002, The American psychologist.

[5]  M. Taylor,et al.  Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. , 1979 .

[6]  Jane M. Young,et al.  Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[7]  A. Kluger,et al.  The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. , 1996 .

[8]  Jack V Tu,et al.  Administrative Data Feedback for Effective Cardiac Treatment: AFFECT, a cluster randomized trial. , 2005, JAMA.

[9]  Susan Michie,et al.  Demystifying theory and its use in improvement , 2015, BMJ quality & safety.

[10]  C. Carver,et al.  Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control-Theory Approach to Human Behavior , 1981 .

[11]  Jacqueline A Pugh,et al.  Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: Making feedback actionable , 2006, Implementation science : IS.

[12]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2006 .

[13]  Jodi Summers Holtrop,et al.  Practice-Based Referrals to a Tobacco Cessation Quit Line: Assessing the Impact of Comparative Feedback vs General Reminders , 2007, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[14]  Susan Michie,et al.  Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: a secondary review , 2016, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[15]  V. Shute.  Focus on Formative Feedback , 2007 .

[16]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback , 2013, Implementation Science.

[17]  Eilidh M Duncan,et al.  An Audit and Feedback Intervention for Reducing Antibiotic Prescribing in General Dental Practice: The RAPiD Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial , 2016, PLoS medicine.

[18]  Craig Whittington,et al.  Using theory to synthesise evidence from behaviour change interventions: the example of audit and feedback. , 2010, Social science & medicine.

[19]  Jeremy M. Grimshaw,et al.  Growing Literature, Stagnant Science? Systematic Review, Meta-Regression and Cumulative Analysis of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Health Care , 2014, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[20]  A. Bandura.  Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy.

[21]  D. Boud,et al.  Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design , 2013 .

[22]  Craig Ramsay,et al.  Effect of enhanced feedback and brief educational reminder messages on laboratory test requesting in primary care: a cluster randomised trial , 2006, The Lancet.

[23]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Response to “the OFF theory of research utilization” , 2005 .

[24]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Reducing research waste with implementation laboratories , 2016, The Lancet.

[25]  C. Carver,et al.  On the Self-Regulation of Behavior , 1998 .

[26]  C J McDonald,et al.  Delayed Feedback of Physician Performance Versus Immediate Reminders to Perform Preventive Care: Effects on Physician Compliance , 1986, Medical care.

[27]  Kevin W Eva,et al.  Building theories of knowledge translation interventions: Use the entire menu of constructs , 2012, Implementation Science.