Cluster randomised trial of an active, multifaceted educational intervention based on the WHO Reproductive Health Library to improve obstetric practices. Primary care guidelines on consultation practices: the effectiveness of computerized versus paper-based versions. A cluster randomized controlled trial among newly qualified primary care physicians.
We conducted a trial to evaluate the effect of an active, multifaceted educational strategy to promote the use of the WHO Reproductive Health Library (RHL) on obstetric practices.
                Cluster randomised trial. The trial was assigned the International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN14055385.
                Twenty-two hospitals in Mexico City and 18 in the Northeast region of Thailand.
                The intervention consisted primarily of three interactive workshops using RHL over a period of 6 months. The focus of the workshops was to provide access to knowledge and enable its use. A computer and support for using both the computer and RHL were provided at each hospital. The control hospitals did not receive any intervention.
                The main outcome measures were changes in ten selected clinical practices as recommended in RHL starting approximately four to six months after the third workshop. Clinical practice data were collected at each hospital from 1000 consecutively delivered women or for a 6-month period whichever was reached sooner.
                The active, multifaceted educational intervention we employed did not affect the ten targeted practices in a consistent and substantive way. Iron/folate supplementation, uterotonic use after birth and breastfeeding on demand were already frequently practiced, and we were unable to measure external cephalic version. Of the remaining six practices, selective, as opposed to routine episiotomy policy increased in the intervention group (difference in adjusted mean rate = 5.3%; 95% CI -0.1 to 10.7%) in Thailand, and there was a trend towards an increased use of antibiotics at caesarean section in Mexico (difference in adjusted mean rate = 19.0%; 95% CI: -8.0 to 46.0%). There were no differences in the use of labour companionship, magnesium sulphate use for eclampsia, corticosteroids for women delivering before 34 weeks and vacuum extraction. RHL awareness (24.8-65.5% in Mexico and 33.9-83.3% in Thailand) and use (4.8-34.9% in Mexico and 15.5-76.4% in Thailand) increased substantially after the intervention in both countries.
                The multifaceted, active strategy to provide health workers with the knowledge and skills to use RHL to improve their practice led to increased access to and use of RHL, however, no consistent or substantive changes in clinical practices were detected within 4-6 months after the third workshop. To compare the effects of computerized and paper-based versions of guidelines on recently qualified physicians' consultation practices.
                Two arm cluster randomized controlled trial. Physicians were randomized to receive computerized or textbook-based versions of the same guidelines for a 4-week study period. Physicians' compliance with guideline recommendations about laboratory, radiological, physical and other examinations, procedures, nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments, physiotherapy, and referrals were measured by case note review.
                There were 139 recently qualified physicians working in 96 primary healthcare centers in Finland who participated in the study. Data on 4,633 patient encounters were abstracted, of which 3,484 were suitable for further analysis. Physicians' compliance with guidelines was high (over 80% for use of laboratory, radiology, physical examinations, and referrals). There were no significant differences in physicians' consultation practices in any of the measured outcomes between the computerized and textbook group.
                Guidelines are a useful source of information for recently qualified physicians working in primary care. However, the method of presentation of the guidelines (electronic or paper) does not have an effect on guideline use or their impact on decisions. Other factors should be considered when choosing the method of presentation of guidelines, such as information-seeking time, ease of use during the consultation, ability to update, production costs, and the physician's own preferences.
Overall there was insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of electronic retrieval of healthcare information by healthcare providers to improve practice and patient care.