Impact of opinion leader-endorsed evidence summaries on the quality of prescribing for patients with cardiovascular disease: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Local opinion leaders are educationally and socially influential physicians. Although they can accelerate the adoption of new evidence in hospitals, their impact on the quality of prescribing for outpatients has only been examined by a few studies. We hypothesized that an intervention consisting of patient-specific one-page evidence summaries, generated and endorsed by local opinion leaders, would improve prescribing of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in heart failure (HF) and that of statins in ischemic heart disease (IHD). METHODS We conducted a community-based randomized controlled trial in patients with HF (not receiving ACE inhibitors or ARBs) and those with IHD (not receiving statins) who were recruited from 40 pharmacies and allocated either to the opinion leader intervention or to usual care based on randomization of their primary care physician. The primary outcome was an increase in the use of efficacious therapies (ACE inhibitors or ARBs in HF and statins in IHD) within 6 months; the secondary outcomes were prescribing changes for HF or IHD. RESULTS A total of 171 patients participated in the study; 87 were allocated to the intervention, whereas 84 were assigned to the control group. The median age of the participants was 75 years; 103 (60%) were female, 54 (32%) had HF, and 117 (68%) had IHD. Overall, 21 (24%) intervention patients started receiving an efficacious medication within 6 months, as compared with 15 (18%) control subjects (relative risk of improvement 1.32, 95% CI 0.73-2.40, P = .31). In the HF subgroup, 38% of the intervention patients started receiving an ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy, as compared with 20% of control subjects (relative risk of improvement 1.90, 95% CI 0.76-4.72, P = .15). In the IHD subgroup, 17% of the intervention patients and 17% of the control subjects started receiving statin therapy (P = .97). CONCLUSIONS The influence of local opinion leaders may be useful for improving the quality of cardiovascular prescribing in the community, but the benefits are likely modest and may be disease specific. Further studies on this method are warranted.

[1]  Sharon E Straus,et al.  Impact of a patient decision aid on care among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a cluster randomized trial , 2005, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[2]  A. Donner,et al.  Randomization by cluster. Sample size requirements and analysis. , 1981, American journal of epidemiology.

[3]  N. Freemantle,et al.  Management of heart failure in primary care (the IMPROVEMENT of Heart Failure Programme): an international survey , 2002, The Lancet.

[4]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Overview of Randomized Trials of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors on Mortality and Morbidity in Patients With Heart Failure , 1995 .

[5]  S. Majumdar,et al.  Evaluating and Improving Physician Prescribing , 2002 .

[6]  K. Teo,et al.  A randomized trial of the effect of community pharmacist intervention on cholesterol risk management: the Study of Cardiovascular Risk Intervention by Pharmacists (SCRIP). , 2002, Archives of internal medicine.

[7]  W. Tierney,et al.  Comparing methods to identify general internal medicine clinic patients with chronic heart failure. , 2001, American heart journal.

[8]  J. Hampton,et al.  PREVALENCE OF ANGINA AS ASSESSED BY A SURVEY OF PRESCRIPTIONS FOR NITRATES , 1988, The Lancet.

[9]  Eugene Vayda,et al.  Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. , 1991, JAMA.

[10]  S B Soumerai,et al.  Effect of local medical opinion leaders on quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial. , 1998, JAMA.

[11]  G. Braunstein,et al.  Meta-Analysis: Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers in Chronic Heart Failure and High-Risk Acute Myocardial Infarction , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[12]  K. Shojania,et al.  Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science. , 2005, Health affairs.

[13]  F. McAlister,et al.  The Treatment and Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Canada: Do Older Patients Receive Efficacious Therapies? , 1999 .

[14]  C. McDonald,et al.  Effects of computerized guidelines for managing heart disease in primary care , 2003, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[15]  Y. Pirson,et al.  CYCLOSPORIN-DILTIAZEM INTERACTION , 1986, The Lancet.

[16]  Ian Graham,et al.  Evidence-based medicine and the practicing clinician , 1999, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[17]  J Gabbay,et al.  Understanding the role of opinion leaders in improving clinical effectiveness. , 2001, Social science & medicine.

[18]  Quality of care for secondary prevention for patients with coronary heart disease: results of the Hastening the Effective Application of Research through Technology (HEART) trial. , 2003 .

[19]  S. Majumdar,et al.  Controlled trial of a multifaceted intervention for improving quality of care for rural patients with type 2 diabetes. , 2003, Diabetes care.

[20]  P. Passmore,et al.  The importance of validating the diagnosis of coronary heart disease when measuring secondary prevention: a cross‐sectional study in general practice , 2002, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[21]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Implementation Science BioMed Central Study protocol , 2006 .

[22]  D. Wood,et al.  Clinical reality of coronary prevention guidelines: a comparison of EUROASPIRE I and II in nine countries , 2001, The Lancet.

[23]  P G Shekelle,et al.  Are nonspecific practice guidelines potentially harmful? A randomized comparison of the effect of nonspecific versus specific guidelines on physician decision making. , 2000, Health services research.

[24]  E. McGlynn,et al.  Measuring Quality of Care , 1996 .

[25]  C. Furberg,et al.  From knowledge to practice in chronic cardiovascular disease: a long and winding road. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  S. Derose,et al.  Point-of-Service reminders for prescribing cardiovascular medications. , 2005, The American journal of managed care.

[27]  F. McAlister,et al.  A cluster randomized trial to assess the impact of opinion leader endorsed evidence summaries on improving quality of prescribing for patients with chronic cardiovascular disease: rationale and design [ISRCTN26365328] , 2005, BMC cardiovascular disorders.

[28]  Randall S Stafford,et al.  The underutilization of cardiac medications of proven benefit, 1990 to 2002. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[29]  J. Tu,et al.  Pharmacological treatment of congestive heart failure in Canada: a description of care in five provinces. , 2005, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[30]  Jeroan J. Allison,et al.  Do Local Opinion Leaders Augment Hospital Quality Improvement Efforts?: A Randomized Trial to Promote Adherence to Unstable Angina Guidelines , 2003, Medical care.

[31]  R. Collins,et al.  Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90 056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins , 2005, The Lancet.

[32]  W. Gibler,et al.  Lipid management in patients with unstable angina pectoris and non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (from CRUSADE). , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.