|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
|
|
Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and health care outcomesDoumit G, Gattellari M, Grimshaw J, O'Brien MA SummaryThis summary of a Cochrane review presents what we know from research about the effect of opinion leaders to promote evidence based practice. The review shows that• Opinion leaders promote evidence based practice. These results are based on moderate quality evidence.
Who are opinion leaders and how could they promote evidence based practice?
There are many ways to identify who are the opinion leaders in a hospital or clinic. There are also many ways opinion leaders can help or persuade people to change. For example, opinion leaders could provide one-to-one or small group teaching, visits to a visit the whole community or go to the health care providers' offices. Opinion leaders could also provide informal education or formal education as lectures. It is not clear what are the best ways to do it.
Benefits of opinion leaders
Opinion leaders identified by asking people "who are the opinion leaders?" on a questionnaire are more likely to change behaviour than opinion leaders that are identified by asking people to judge others who were pre-selected as opinion leaders.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 4, Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
July 21. 1997 AbstractBackgroundClinical practice is not always evidence-based and, therefore, may not optimise patient outcomes. Opinion leaders disseminating and implementing 'best evidence' is one innovative method that holds promise as a strategy to bridge evidence-practice gaps. ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of the use of local opinion leaders in improving the behaviour of health care professionals and patient outcomes. Search strategyWe searched MEDLINE, Health Star, SIGLE and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Trials Register. We did not apply date restrictions to our search strategy. Searches were last updated in February 2005. In addition, we searched reference lists of all potential studies that were identified. Selection criteriaStudies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials that used objective measures of performance/provider behaviour and/or patient health outcomes. Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers extracted data from each study and assessed its methodological quality. We calculated the absolute difference in the risk of 'non-compliance' with desired practice, adjusting for baseline levels of non-compliance where these data were available. Main resultsTwelve studies met our eligibility criteria. The adjusted absolute risk difference of non-compliance with desired practice varied from -6% (favouring control) to +25% (favouring opinion leader intervention). Overall, the median adjusted risk difference (ARD) was 0.10 representing a 10% absolute decrease in non-compliance in the intervention group. Authors' conclusionsThe use of local opinion leaders can successfully promote evidence-based practice. However the feasibility of its widespread use remains uncertain. |