43
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Incentive payments to general practitioners aimed at increasing opportunistic testing of young women for chlamydia: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Financial incentives have been used for many years internationally to improve quality of care in general practice. The aim of this pilot study was to determine if offering general practitioners (GP) a small incentive payment per test would increase chlamydia testing in women aged 16 to 24 years, attending general practice.

          Methods

          General practice clinics (n = 12) across Victoria, Australia, were cluster randomized to receive either a $AUD5 payment per chlamydia test or no payment for testing 16 to 24 year old women for chlamydia. Data were collected on the number of chlamydia tests and patient consultations undertaken by each GP over two time periods: 12 month pre-trial and 6 month trial period. The impact of the intervention was assessed using a mixed effects logistic regression model, accommodating for clustering at GP level.

          Results

          Testing increased from 6.2% (95% CI: 4.2, 8.4) to 8.8% (95% CI: 4.8, 13.0) (p = 0.1) in the control group and from 11.5% (95% CI: 4.6, 18.5) to 13.4% (95% CI: 9.5, 17.5) (p = 0.4) in the intervention group. Overall, the intervention did not result in a significant increase in chlamydia testing in general practice. The odds ratio for an increase in testing in the intervention group compared to the control group was 0.9 (95% CI: 0.6, 1.2). Major barriers to increased chlamydia testing reported by GPs included a lack of time, difficulty in remembering to offer testing and a lack of patient awareness around testing.

          Conclusions

          A small financial incentive alone did not increase chlamydia testing among young women attending general practice. It is possible small incentive payments in conjunction with reminder and feedback systems may be effective, as may higher financial incentive payments. Further research is required to determine if financial incentives can increase testing in Australian general practice, the type and level of financial scheme required and whether incentives needs to be part of a multi-faceted package.

          Trial Registration

          Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12608000499381.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions.

          Increasing recognition of the failure to translate research findings into practice has led to greater awareness of the importance of using active dissemination and implementation strategies. Although there is a growing body of research evidence about the effectiveness of different strategies, this is not easily accessible to policy makers and professionals. To identify, appraise, and synthesize systematic reviews of professional educational or quality assurance interventions to improve quality of care. An overview was made of systematic reviews of professional behavior change interventions published between 1966 and 1998. Forty-one reviews were identified covering a wide range of interventions and behaviors. In general, passive approaches are generally ineffective and unlikely to result in behavior change. Most other interventions are effective under some circumstances; none are effective under all circumstances. Promising approaches include educational outreach (for prescribing) and reminders. Multifaceted interventions targeting different barriers to change are more likely to be effective than single interventions. Although the current evidence base is incomplete, it provides valuable insights into the likely effectiveness of different interventions. Future quality improvement or educational activities should be informed by the findings of systematic reviews of professional behavior change interventions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Clinical practice. Genital chlamydial infections.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Genital chlamydial infections: epidemiology and reproductive sequelae.

              Genital chlamydial infection is increasing and is now more common than gonorrhea. A sizable percentage of chlamydial infections of the lower genital tract in women progress to endometritis and salpingitis. Tubal infertility and ectopic pregnancy are important sequelae. Failure to control chlamydial infections reflects the following four factors: (1) Many cases are mild or asymptomatic; (2) diagnostic tests are expensive and technically demanding; (3) at least 7 days of multiple-dose therapy are currently required; and (4) partner notification is not routinely performed. Thus early identification of infected persons and compliance with curative therapy are less likely than with other sexually transmitted bacterial diseases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2010
                17 February 2010
                : 10
                : 70
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Sexual Health Unit, Melbourne School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                [2 ]Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                [3 ]Primary Care Research Unit, Department of General Practice, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                [4 ]Family Planning Victoria, Box Hill, Victoria 3128, Australia
                [5 ]Centre for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic and Analytic Epidemiology, Melbourne School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                [6 ]Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
                [7 ]General Practice Divisions Victoria, 458 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                [8 ]Centre for Women's Health, Gender and Society, Melbourne School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia
                Article
                1471-2458-10-70
                10.1186/1471-2458-10-70
                2841675
                20158918
                f8b93809-eb81-4a0f-aaf1-ebb33406887b
                Copyright ©2010 Bilardi et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 17 September 2009
                : 17 February 2010
                Categories
                Research article

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article