Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 16, 2026

Best Current Practice for Obtaining High Quality EEG Data During Simultaneous fMRI
Published on: June 3, 2013
Process evaluation of the Data-driven Quality Improvement in Primary Care (DQIP) trial: quantitative examination of
Tobias Dreischulte1,2, Aileen Grant3, Adrian Hapca2
1Prescribing Support Unit, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Objectives:
The cluster randomised trial of the Data-driven Quality Improvement in Primary Care (DQIP) intervention showed that education, informatics and financial incentives for general medical practices to review patients with ongoing high-risk prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antiplatelets reduced the primary end point of high-risk prescribing by 37%, where both ongoing and new high-risk prescribing were significantly reduced. This quantitative process evaluation examined practice factors associated with (1) participation in the DQIP trial, (2) review activity (extent and nature of documented reviews) and (3) practice level effectiveness (relative reductions in the primary end point).
Setting/Participants:
Invited practices recruited (n=33) and not recruited (n=32) to the DQIP trial in Scotland, UK.
Outcome Measures:
(1) Characteristics of recruited versus non-recruited practices. Associations of (2) practice characteristics and 'adoption' (self-reported implementation work done by practices) with documented review activity and (3) of practice characteristics, DQIP adoption and review activity with effectiveness.
Results:
(1) Recruited practices had lower performance in the quality and outcomes framework than those declining participation. (2) Not being an approved general practitioner training practice and higher self-reported adoption were significantly associated with higher review activity. (3) Effectiveness ranged from a relative increase in high-risk prescribing of 24.1% to a relative reduction of 77.2%. High-risk prescribing and DQIP adoption (but not documented review activity) were significantly associated with greater effectiveness in the final multivariate model, explaining 64.0% of variation in effectiveness.
Conclusions:
Intervention implementation and effectiveness of the DQIP intervention varied substantially between practices. Although the DQIP intervention primarily targeted review of ongoing high-risk prescribing, the finding that self-reported DQIP adoption was a stronger predictor of effectiveness than documented review activity supports that reducing initiation and/or re-initiation of high-risk prescribing is key to its effectiveness.
Trial Registration Number:
NCT01425502; Post-results.
More Related Videos
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
08:13Development and Implementation of a Multi-Disciplinary Technology Enhanced Care Pathway for Youth and Adults with Concussion
Published on: January 20, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Role of Communication in the Nursing Process II: Planning and Implementation
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching II: Planning and Implementation
What is Variation?
The range, standard deviation, standard error, and variance are the different measures of variation.
Range: The range is the difference between its maximum and...
Variation: Normal Distribution, Range, and Standard Deviation
Variation
When independent and dependent variables are plotted on a scatter plot, the slope of a line is a value that describes the rate of change between the two...