Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of brjgenpracThe British Journal of General Practice
Br J Gen Pract. 2002 April; 52(477): 290–295.
PMCID: PMC1314269

A randomised controlled trial of the effect of educational outreach by community pharmacists on prescribing in UK general practice.

Nick Freemantle, Irwin Nazareth, Martin Eccles, John Wood, Andrew Haines, and Evidence-based OutReach trialists


BACKGROUND: Educational outreach visits are commonly used to promote changes in prescribing in family practice. However, the effectiveness of outreach visits has not been evaluated across a range of settings. AIM: To estimate the effectiveness of educational outreach visits on United Kingdom (UK) general practice prescribing and to examine the extent to which practice characteristics influenced outcome. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in 12 health authorities in England. METHOD: Educational outreach visits were made to practices that received two of four guidelines. Each practice provided data on treatment of patients for all four guidelines for both pre and post-intervention periods. The primary outcome is average effect across all four guidelines. Secondary analyses examined the predictive effect of practice and guideline characteristics. RESULTS: Seventy per cent of practices approached agreed to take part in the intervention. Overall, educational outreach was associated with a significant improvement in prescribing practice (odds ratio [OR] = 1.24 [95% CI = 1.07 to 1.42]), a 5.2% (95% CI = 1.7% to 8.7%) increase in the number of patients treated within the guideline recommendations. Smaller practices (two or fewer full-time equivalent practitioners) responded much more favourably to educational outreach than larger practices. Smaller practices improved their performance in line with the guidelines by 13.5% (95% CI = 6% to 20.9%) attributable to outreach, while larger practices improved by only 1.4% (95% CI = -2.4% to 5.3%, P-value for interaction <0.001). CONCLUSION: In large practices, educational outreach alone is unlikely to achieve worthwhile change. There is good evidence to support the use of educational outreach visits in small practices.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (211K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Freemantle N, Eccles M, Wood J, Mason J, Nazareth I, Duggan C, Young P, Haines A, Drummond M, Russell I, et al. A randomized trial of Evidence-based OutReach (EBOR): rationale and design. Control Clin Trials. 1999 Oct;20(5):479–492. [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. North of England evidence based guidelines development project: methods of developing guidelines for efficient drug use in primary care. BMJ. 1998 Apr 18;316(7139):1232–1235. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. North of England evidence based guideline development project: guideline on the use of aspirin as secondary prophylaxis for vascular disease in primary care. North of England Aspirin Guideline Development Group. BMJ. 1998 Apr 25;316(7140):1303–1309. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. North of England evidence based development project: guideline for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in primary care management of adults with symptomatic heart failure. BMJ. 1998 May 2;316(7141):1369–1375. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. North of England evidence based guideline development project: summary guideline for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus basic analgesia in treating the pain of degenerative arthritis. The North of England Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Guideline Development Group. BMJ. 1998 Aug 22;317(7157):526–530. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Freemantle N, Mason J. North of England evidence-based guideline development project: summary version of guidelines for the choice of antidepressants for depression in primary care. North of England Anti-depressant Guideline Development Group. Fam Pract. 1999 Apr;16(2):103–111. [PubMed]
  • Avorn J, Soumerai SB. Improving drug-therapy decisions through educational outreach. A randomized controlled trial of academically based "detailing". N Engl J Med. 1983 Jun 16;308(24):1457–1463. [PubMed]
  • Freemantle N, Drummond M. Should clinical trials with concurrent economic analyses be blinded? JAMA. 1997 Jan 1;277(1):63–64. [PubMed]
  • Diwan VK, Wahlström R, Tomson G, Beermann B, Sterky G, Eriksson B. Effects of "group detailing" on the prescribing of lipid-lowering drugs: a randomized controlled trial in Swedish primary care. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 May;48(5):705–711. [PubMed]
  • Baker R. Is it time to review the idea of compliance with guidelines? Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Jan;51(462):7–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Fender GR, Prentice A, Gorst T, Nixon RM, Duffy SW, Day NE, Smith SK. Randomised controlled trial of educational package on management of menorrhagia in primary care: the Anglia menorrhagia education study. BMJ. 1999 May 8;318(7193):1246–1250. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Modell M, Wonke B, Anionwu E, Khan M, Tai SS, Lloyd M, Modell B. A multidisciplinary approach for improving services in primary care: randomised controlled trial of screening for haemoglobin disorders. BMJ. 1998 Sep 19;317(7161):788–791. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Gill PS, Mäkelä M, Vermeulen KM, Freemantle N, Ryan G, Bond C, Thorsen T, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM. Changing doctor prescribing behaviour. Pharm World Sci. 1999 Aug;21(4):158–167. [PubMed]
  • Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Steen N, Parkin D, Purves I, McColl E, Rousseau N. The design and analysis of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate computerized decision support in primary care: the COGENT study. Fam Pract. 2000 Apr;17(2):180–186. [PubMed]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners