Cited by 571Health Policy Implementation ScienceClinical practice guidelines implementationHealth Sciences Research and Education

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Practice Facilitation Within Primary Care Settings

Open access
Baskerville, N. B., Liddy, C., Hogg, W.·2012·The Annals of Family Medicine

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study was a systematic review with a quantitative synthesis of the literature examining the overall effect size of practice facilitation and possible moderating factors. The primary outcome was the change in evidence-based practice behavior calculated as a standardized mean difference. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched 4 electronic databases and the reference lists of published literature reviews to find practice facilitation studies that identified evidence-based guideline implementation within primary care practices as the outcome. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies published from 1966 to December 2010 in English language only peer-reviewed journals. Reviews of each study were conducted and assessed for quality; data were abstracted, and standardized mean difference estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Publication bias, influence, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies contributed to the analysis for a total of 1,398 participating practices: 697 practice facilitation intervention and 701 control group practices. The degree of variability between studies was consistent with what would be expected to occur by chance alone (I2 = 20%). An overall effect size of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.68) favored practice facilitation (z = 8.76; P <.001), and publication bias was evident. Primary care practices are 2.76 (95% CI, 2.18-3.43) times more likely to adopt evidence-based guidelines through practice facilitation. Meta-regression analysis indicated that tailoring (P = .05), the intensity of the intervention (P = .03), and the number of intervention practices per facilitator (P = .004) modified evidence-based guideline adoption. CONCLUSION: Practice facilitation has a moderately robust effect on evidence-based guideline adoption within primary care. Implementation fidelity factors, such as tailoring, the number of practices per facilitator, and the intensity of the intervention, have important resource implications.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1370/afm.1312

Cites

107 of 107 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Within the 23 studies reviewed, facilitators employed a number of different facilitation strategies, in particular audit and feedback (used in 100 per cent of studies) and interactive consensus building and goal setting (91 per cent use), alongside reminders, tailoring to context and quality improvement tools such as Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles.

    “Within the 23 studies reviewed, facilitators employed a number of different facilitation strategies, in particular audit and feedback (used in 100 per cent of studies) and interactive consensus building and goal setting (91 per cent use), alongside reminders, tailoring to context and quality improvement tools such as Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles.”
  • A 2012 systematic review of practice facilitation in primary care concluded that practices supported by a facilitator were 2.76 times more likely to adopt evidence-based clinical guidelines.

    “A 2012 systematic review of practice facilitation in primary care concluded that practices supported by a facilitator were 2.76 times more likely to adopt evidence-based clinical guidelines [52].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Effectiveness and effi ciency of guideline dissemination and implementation strate- gies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21(1):149.
  2. Campbell MK, Mollison J, Grimshaw JM. Cluster trials in implemen- tation research: estimation of intracluster correlation coeffi cients and sample size. Stat Med. 2001;20(3):391-399.
  3. Dietrich AJ, O'Connor GT, Keller A, Carney PA, Levy D, Whaley FS. Cancer: improving early detection and prevention. A community practice randomised trial. BMJ. 1992;304(6828):687-691.
  4. Bordley WC, Margolis PA, Stuart J, Lannon C, Keyes L. Improv- ing preventive service delivery through offi ce systems. Pediatrics. 2001;108(3):E41.
  5. Solberg LI, Kottke TE, Brekke ML. Will primary care clinics organize themselves to improve the delivery of preventive services? A ran- domized controlled trial. Prev Med. 1998;27(4):623-631.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baskerville, N. B., Liddy, C., & Hogg, W.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Venue
The Annals of Family Medicine
Published
2012-01-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
63-74
ISSN
  • 1544-1709 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-1717
OpenAlex
W2098408559
Cited by
571
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Annals of Family Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
practice facilitation, evidence-based practice, guideline implementation, primary care, implementation fidelity, intervention tailoring, intervention intensity, publication bias
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Health Facility Administrators, Humans, Primary Health Care, Regression Analysis, Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement

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