Cited by 15Healthcare Quality and ManagementHealth Policy Implementation ScienceClinical practice guidelines implementation

The effect of external feedback on the management of medicare inpatients with congestive heart failure

Hayes, Risa P., Baker, David W., Luthi, Jean-Christophe, Baggett, Rebecca L., McClellan, William, Fitzgerald, Dawn, Abrams, Frederick R., Bratzler, Dale +1 more·2002·American Journal of Medical Quality

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of 2 feedback strategies on the adherence to congestive heart failure (CHF) guidelines. Thirty-two hospitals in 4 states were randomized to receive either a written feedback intervention (low-intensity intervention [LII]) or an intervention involving feedback, a physician liaison, and quality improvement tools (high-intensity intervention [HII]). CHF quality indicators were assessed, and quality managers were interviewed at baseline and remeasurement. No significant changes in quality indicators were found as a result of either intervention. Seventy-eight percent of quality managers indicated that hospital project implementation had not begun until shortly before remeasurement. HII quality managers perceived the CHF project as significantly more successful compared with LII quality managers (63% versus 13%, P < .01). Evaluation of the effects of external feedback on practice behavior requires sufficient time for organizational and individual clinician change to occur. Physician liaisons may play a role in facilitating this change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/106286060201700605

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Hayes 2002 found no statistically significant effect on heart failure (median adjusted RD = -1%; no P values reported).

    “Hayes 2002 conducted a very similar trial targeting heart failure, again finding no statistically significant effect (median adjusted RD = ‐1%; no P values reported).”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hayes, R. P., Baker, D. W., Luthi, J.-C., Baggett, R. L., McClellan, W., Fitzgerald, D., Abrams, F. R., Bratzler, D., & Ballard, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Eli Lilly (United States) (US)
  • Georgia Medical Care Foundation, Atlanta
  • CFMC, Aurora, Colo
  • Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Quality (US)
  • Baylor Scott & White Health (US)
Corresponding author
Hayes, Risa P.
Venue
American Journal of Medical Quality
Published
2002-11
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
225-235
ISSN
  • 1062-8606 (ISSN-L)
  • 1555-824X
OpenAlex
W2009805586
Cited by
15
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Medical Quality (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
congestive heart failure, external feedback, guideline adherence, Medicare inpatients, hospital quality improvement, quality managers, quality indicators, organizational change, clinician behavior change
MeSH terms
Aged, Feedback, Medicare, Heart Failure, Humans, Medical Staff, Hospital, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Quality Assurance, Health Care, United States, Multivariate Analysis, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review