Just in time information for clinicians: a questionnaire evaluation of the ATTRACT project

Abstract

General practitioners generate many clinical questions during consultations. However, when they seek answers to these queries they tend to rely on colleagues and "desk top" references rather than searching the literature themselves. [1][2][3] ATTRACT was created in 1997 to provide rapid, evidence based summaries to clinical queries. All general practitioners in Gwent were invited to send their clinical queries to ATTRACT. For each query an information manager (JB) undertook a rapid search of the literature. The information found was appraised, summarised onto one side of A4 paper, and faxed to the requestor within six hours (see appendix on the BMJ's website for more details on the search, appraisal, and summary process). Examples of the questions received include "Do decongestants help in people with eustachian tube dysfunction?" and "What are the risks of flying while pregnant?" (see BMJ's website for list of most popular questions). We report here an initial evaluation of this service. Participants, methods, and resultsWe developed a brief anonymised questionnaire to seek doctors' views on the usefulness of ATTRACT. We sent this to the first 15 general practitioners to use the service and, one year after the initial survey, to the general practitioners who had asked the 35 most recent questions. In addition, we analysed the clinical queries received during that period (1 January 1997 to 31 January 1998).Forty two (84%) of the 50 general practitioners replied. Of these, 29 (69%) rated the service "very useful" and 13 (31%) rated it "useful." All the respondents rated the service as "very quick" or "quick," and all reported that they would use it again. For the 40 doctors who replied to the question about the effect of the supplied information, nine clinicians were already practising in line with the evidence supplied, 24 changed their practice as a result of the information, six did not change practice because of the weakness of the presented evidence, and the remaining one asked a question about prognosis so that change in practice was not relevant.Of the 193 questions received by ATTRACT in 13 months, 124 (64%) related to therapeutic issues and 23 (12%) related to harm, the next most prevalent category (figure). CommentOur study shows that Gwent general practitioners use and value the ATTRACT service. Although our assessment is based on a small number of users, it merits reporting because of the strength of the opinions expressed and our clear impression that fast answers to clinical questions actually change practice. This study is the first to evaluate a fast, evidence based query answering service for doctors in the NHS, and our results support McColl et al's conclusion that doctors want summaries of evidence rather than the skills to produce them themselves. 4 Our results also confirm Smith's and Ely et al's reports that most clinical queries relate to therapeutic issues. The reported changes in practice are encouraging. This is probably because, instead of "pushing" information towards clinicians in th...

Problem-oriented drug information: physicians’ expectations and impact on clinical practice

“…It is possible that the responders in the other studies did not assess patient information as a change in clinical practice. Evidence-based answering services for GPs, where clinical questions in general and not only limited to pharmacotherapy are being answered by clinical librarians or GPs have also evaluated the impact on the patient [18][19][20][21]. All these studies promoted the usefulness of an evidence-based answering service, and 20-55% of the GPs reported that the given answers had an effect on their patients.…”

A clinical informaticist to support primary care decision making

“…15 We are unaware of any published reports of a GP led answering service in the UK. The reasons for choosing a GP as informaticist were threefold 16 : + doctors often ask colleagues for answers to questions [2][3][4] ; + a GP is likely to understand the precise nature and context of the question; + a GP is ideally placed to help a colleague "frame" a question.…”

Use of Clinical Anatomy Resources by Musculoskeletal Outpatient Physiotherapists in Australian Public Hospitals: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…In agreement with previous studies of general clinical resource use in the medical and allied health professions, physiotherapists primarily used clinical anatomy resources for current patient management. [1][2][3][4]9 More than half of respondents (55%) used clinical anatomy resources at least once per week; the majority (66%) used printed resources more frequently than online resources. However, 85% of physiotherapists in our study used online clinical anatomy resources, a figure higher than that found in a previous study investigating physiotherapists' use of an online clinical resource portal in general hospital practice in New South Wales in 2004 (55%) 2 but similar to rates of use of general clinical resources online by physiotherapists in the United Kingdom in 2013 (85%).…”

“…Clinical resources can provide up-to-date information, contribute to decision making, enhance patient care, and facilitate clinical reasoning. [1][2][3][4] The nature of clinicians' use of clinical resources is therefore important because of its potential influence on clinical practice and patient outcomes.…”