Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of Findings for comparison two: Electronic guideline implementations versus paper version of the guideline

From: Effectiveness of electronic guideline-based implementation systems in ambulatory care settings - a systematic review

Study

Risk of bias

No of patients/professionals

Intervention

Outcomes

    

Process

Patient

Eccles[24]

Cluster-RCT

low

2,400 patients, 60 primary care practices

Intervention group one: Computerized asthma guidelines + paper version of the guidelines for asthma and angina

Intervention group two: Computerized angina guidelines + paper version of the guidelines for asthma and angina

N

 

Tierney '03[15]

Cluster-RCT

low

706 patients, 246 physicians

Intervention group one: Computerized cardiac care suggestions + printed summary of the guidelines

Intervention group two and three: not included in analysis of this review

Control group: Usual care + printed summary of the guidelines

N

N

Tierney '05[16]

Cluster-RCT

low

706 patients, 246 physicians

Intervention group one: Computerized feedback for asthma and COPD + printed summary of the guidelines

Intervention group two and three: not included in analysis of this review

Control group: Usual care + printed summary of the guidelines

N

N

Jousimaa[37]

Cluster-RCT

moderate

2,813 evaluated cases, 130 physicians

Intervention group: CD ROM of primary care guidelines

Control group: Text based version of primary care guidelines

N

 

Montgomery[26]

Cluster-RCT

moderate

614 patients, 27 primary care practices

Intervention group: Computer-based clinical decision support system and a risk chart on absolute cardiovascular risk, blood pressure, and prescribing of cardiovascular drugs in hypertensive patients.

Control group: Cardiovascular risk chart on paper alone

N

N

Murray[17]

Cluster-RCT

moderate

712 patients, 246 physicians

Intervention group one: Computerized suggestions for hypertension + printed, referenced summary of the locally approved guidelines

Intervention group two and three: not included in analysis of this review

Control group: Usual care + printed, referenced summary of the locally approved guidelines

N

N

Wilson[27]

Cluster-RCT

moderate

86 practices

Intervention group: Electronic referral guidelines for breast cancer + mailed referral guidelines

Control group: Usual care + mailed referral guidelines

N

N

Kuilboer[30]

Cluster-RCT

high

156,772 patients, 40 primary care physicians

Intervention group: AsthmaCritic provides patient-specific feedback for asthma and COPD + disposal of the asthma and COPD guidelines

Control group: Usual care + disposal of the asthma and COPD guideline

N

 
  1. Y = if at least 50% of outcomes significant, N = if less than 50% of outcomes significant