Skip Navigation

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2004 16(5):391-398; doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzh070
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Verstappen, W. H. J. M.
Right arrow Articles by van Der Weijden, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Verstappen, W. H. J. M.
Right arrow Articles by van Der Weijden, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 16 no. 5 © International Society for Quality in Health Care and Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved

Comparing cost effects of two quality strategies to improve test ordering in primary care: a randomized trial

Wim H. J. M. Verstappen1,2, Frits van Merode3, Jeremy Grimshaw4, Willy I. Dubois1,({dagger}), Richard P. T. M. Grol1 and Trudy van Der Weijden1

1 Centre for Quality of Care Research (WOK), Care and Public Health Research Unit (CAPHRI), Department of General Practice, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 2 Centre for Diagnostics and Consultation, St Jans Hospital, Weert, 3 Department of Health Organisation Policy and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands, 4 Research Unit, Department of Public Health, Ottawa University, Ottawa, Canada

Objective. To determine the costs and cost reductions of an innovative strategy aimed at improving test ordering routines of primary care physicians, compared with a traditional strategy.

Design. Multicenter randomized controlled trial with randomization at the local primary care physicians group level.

Setting. Primary care: local primary care physicians groups in five regions of the Netherlands with diagnostic centers.

Study participants. Twenty-seven existing local primary care physicians groups, including 194 primary care physicians.

Intervention. The test ordering strategy was developed systematically, and combined feedback, education on guidelines, and quality improvement sessions in small groups. In regular quality meetings in local groups, primary care physicians discussed each others’ test ordering behavior, related it to guidelines, and made individual and/or group plans for change. Thirteen groups engaged in the entire strategy (complete intervention arm), while 14 groups received feedback only (feedback arm).

Main outcome measure. Running costs, development costs, and research costs were calculated for the intervention period per primary care physician per 6 months. The mean costs of tests ordered per primary care physician per 6 months were assessed at baseline and follow-up.

Results. The new strategy was found to cost {euro}702.00, while the feedback strategy cost {euro}58.00. When including running costs only, the intervention was found to cost {euro}554.70, compared with {euro}17.10 per primary care physician per 6 months in the feedback arm. When excluding opportunity costs for the physicians’ time spent, the intervention was found to cost {euro}92.70 per physician per 6 months in the complete intervention arm. The mean costs reduction that physicians in that arm achieved by reducing unnecessary tests was {euro}144 larger per physician per 6 months than the physicians in the feedback arm (P = 0.048).

Conclusion. On the basis of our findings, including the expected non-monetary benefits, we recommend further long-term effect and cost-effect studies on the implementation of the quality strategy.

Keywords: costs, costs analysis, diagnostic tests, feedback, health care, quality assurance, routine

Address reprint requests to Wim H. J. M. Verstappen, Department of General Practice, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: wim.verstappen{at}HAG.unimaas.nl

Accepted for publication June 7, 2004.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Fam PractHome page
C. A. McNulty, M. Thomas, J. Bowen, C. Buckley, A. Charlett, D. Gelb, C. Foy, J. Sloss, and S. Smellie
Improving the appropriateness of laboratory submissions for urinalysis from general practice
Fam. Pract., August 1, 2008; 25(4): 272 - 278.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Qual Saf Health CareHome page
D. M Woods, E. J Thomas, J. L Holl, K. B Weiss, and T. A Brennan
Ambulatory care adverse events and preventable adverse events leading to a hospital admission
Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 127 - 131.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
M. J. Poley, K. I. Edelenbos, M. Mosseveld, M. A.M. van Wijk, D. H. de Bakker, J. van der Lei, and M. P.M.H. Rutten-van Molken
Cost Consequences of Implementing an Electronic Decision Support System for Ordering Laboratory Tests in Primary Care: Evidence from a Controlled Prospective Study in The Netherlands
Clin. Chem., February 1, 2007; 53(2): 213 - 219.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int J Qual Health CareHome page
T. Perneger
Ten reasons to conduct a randomized study in quality improvement
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2006; 18(6): 395 - 396.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
W. H. J. M. Verstappen, T. van der Weijden, W. I. Dubois, I. Smeele, J. Hermsen, F. E. S. Tan, and R. P. T. M. Grol
Improving Test Ordering in Primary Care: The Added Value of a Small-Group Quality Improvement Strategy Compared With Classic Feedback Only
Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2004; 2(6): 569 - 575.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.