PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Colquhoun, Heather
AU  - Michie, Susan
AU  - Sales, Anne
AU  - Ivers, Noah
AU  - Grimshaw, J M
AU  - Carroll, Kelly
AU  - Chalifoux, Mathieu
AU  - Eva, Kevin
AU  - Brehaut, Jamie
TI  - Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: a secondary review
AID  - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005004
DP  - 2017 Jan 01
TA  - BMJ Quality & Safety
PG  - 54--60
VI  - 26
IP  - 1
4099  - http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/26/1/54.short
4100  - http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/26/1/54.full
SO  - BMJ Qual Saf2017 Jan 01; 26
AB  - Background Audit and feedback (A&F) is a frequently used intervention aiming to support implementation of research evidence into clinical practice with positive, yet variable, effects. Our understanding of effective A&F has been limited by poor reporting and intervention heterogeneity. Our objective was to describe the extent of these issues.Methods Using a secondary review of A&F interventions and a consensus-based process to identify modifiable A&F elements, we examined intervention descriptions in 140 trials of A&F to quantify reporting limitations and describe the interventions.Results We identified 17 modifiable A&F intervention elements; 14 were examined to quantify reporting limitations and all 17 were used to describe the interventions. Clear reporting of the elements ranged from 56% to 97% with a median of 89%. There was considerable variation in A&F interventions with 51% for individual providers only, 92% targeting behaviour change and 79% targeting processes of care, 64% performed by the provider group and 81% reporting aggregate patient data.Conclusions Our process identified 17 A&F design elements, demonstrated gaps in reporting and helped understand the degree of variation in A&F interventions.