Limits...
A randomised trial assessing the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic versus tailored feedback about health risks for a high need primary care sample.

Noble N, Paul C, Carey M, Blunden S, Turner N - BMC Fam Pract (2015)

Bottom Line: The aims of this study were to examine the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic compared to tailored feedback on self-reported health risk behaviours among a high need sample of people attending an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS).The exit survey asked about feedback acceptability and effectiveness.Future work to rigorously evaluate the longer-term effectiveness of the provision of tailored health risk feedback for Aboriginal Australians, as well as other high need groups, is still needed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour and School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia. Natasha.Noble@newcastle.edu.au.

ABSTRACT

Background: Tailored feedback has been shown to be effective for modifying health risk behaviours and may aid the provision of preventive care by general practitioners (GPs). However, provision of tailored patient feedback for vulnerable or socially disadvantaged groups is not well explored. The aims of this study were to examine the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic compared to tailored feedback on self-reported health risk behaviours among a high need sample of people attending an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS).

Methods: Participants attending two ACCHSs in regional New South Wales completed a touch screen health risk survey and received either generic or tailored health risk feedback. Participants were asked to complete an exit survey after their appointment. The exit survey asked about feedback acceptability and effectiveness. Self-reported ease of understanding, relevance and whether the generic versus tailored feedback helped patients talk to their GP was compared using Chi-square analysis; The mean number of survey health risks talked about or for which additional actions were undertaken (such as provision of lifestyle advice or referral) was compared using t-tests.

Results: Eighty seven participants (36 % consent rate) completed the exit survey. Tailored feedback was rated as more relevant and was more likely to be shown to the participant's GP than generic feedback. There was no difference in the mean number of health risk topics discussed or number of additional actions taken by the GP by type of feedback.

Conclusions: Tailored and generic feedback showed no difference in effectiveness, and little difference in acceptability, among this socially disadvantaged population. Completing a health risk survey and receiving any type of feedback may have overwhelmed more subtle differences in outcomes between the generic and the tailored feedback. Future work to rigorously evaluate the longer-term effectiveness of the provision of tailored health risk feedback for Aboriginal Australians, as well as other high need groups, is still needed.

Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN12614001205628. Registered 11 November 2014.

No MeSH data available.


Flow chart of participant recruitment and allocation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4525725&req=5

Fig1: Flow chart of participant recruitment and allocation

Mentions: Participants were approached by a Research Assistant (RA) in the waiting room and invited to complete a health risk survey while waiting for their appointment. Assistance to complete the survey was offered as required. An Aboriginal RA undertook patient recruitment for half of the recruitment period. Participants were asked to have their weight and height measured (optional), and were able to end the survey if called in for their appointment. After completing the survey, participants were offered printed generic or tailored feedback (depending on session randomisation) and asked to complete a brief exit survey after their GP appointment. An identification slip given to participants was used to link their health risk and exit survey data. Participants were told that they could show the feedback to their doctor if they wanted, and instructed to ask their doctor or health worker if they had any questions about the feedback. It was not possible to blind participants, health care providers or researchers to allocation to intervention condition. A flow chart showing participant recruitment and allocation is shown in Fig. 1.Fig. 1


A randomised trial assessing the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic versus tailored feedback about health risks for a high need primary care sample.

Noble N, Paul C, Carey M, Blunden S, Turner N - BMC Fam Pract (2015)

Flow chart of participant recruitment and allocation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4525725&req=5

Fig1: Flow chart of participant recruitment and allocation
Mentions: Participants were approached by a Research Assistant (RA) in the waiting room and invited to complete a health risk survey while waiting for their appointment. Assistance to complete the survey was offered as required. An Aboriginal RA undertook patient recruitment for half of the recruitment period. Participants were asked to have their weight and height measured (optional), and were able to end the survey if called in for their appointment. After completing the survey, participants were offered printed generic or tailored feedback (depending on session randomisation) and asked to complete a brief exit survey after their GP appointment. An identification slip given to participants was used to link their health risk and exit survey data. Participants were told that they could show the feedback to their doctor if they wanted, and instructed to ask their doctor or health worker if they had any questions about the feedback. It was not possible to blind participants, health care providers or researchers to allocation to intervention condition. A flow chart showing participant recruitment and allocation is shown in Fig. 1.Fig. 1

Bottom Line: The aims of this study were to examine the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic compared to tailored feedback on self-reported health risk behaviours among a high need sample of people attending an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS).The exit survey asked about feedback acceptability and effectiveness.Future work to rigorously evaluate the longer-term effectiveness of the provision of tailored health risk feedback for Aboriginal Australians, as well as other high need groups, is still needed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour and School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia. Natasha.Noble@newcastle.edu.au.

ABSTRACT

Background: Tailored feedback has been shown to be effective for modifying health risk behaviours and may aid the provision of preventive care by general practitioners (GPs). However, provision of tailored patient feedback for vulnerable or socially disadvantaged groups is not well explored. The aims of this study were to examine the acceptability and effectiveness of providing generic compared to tailored feedback on self-reported health risk behaviours among a high need sample of people attending an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS).

Methods: Participants attending two ACCHSs in regional New South Wales completed a touch screen health risk survey and received either generic or tailored health risk feedback. Participants were asked to complete an exit survey after their appointment. The exit survey asked about feedback acceptability and effectiveness. Self-reported ease of understanding, relevance and whether the generic versus tailored feedback helped patients talk to their GP was compared using Chi-square analysis; The mean number of survey health risks talked about or for which additional actions were undertaken (such as provision of lifestyle advice or referral) was compared using t-tests.

Results: Eighty seven participants (36 % consent rate) completed the exit survey. Tailored feedback was rated as more relevant and was more likely to be shown to the participant's GP than generic feedback. There was no difference in the mean number of health risk topics discussed or number of additional actions taken by the GP by type of feedback.

Conclusions: Tailored and generic feedback showed no difference in effectiveness, and little difference in acceptability, among this socially disadvantaged population. Completing a health risk survey and receiving any type of feedback may have overwhelmed more subtle differences in outcomes between the generic and the tailored feedback. Future work to rigorously evaluate the longer-term effectiveness of the provision of tailored health risk feedback for Aboriginal Australians, as well as other high need groups, is still needed.

Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN12614001205628. Registered 11 November 2014.

No MeSH data available.