• Simone A van Dulmen, Marjo Maas, J Bart Staal, Geert Rutten, Henri Kiers, Maria Nijhuis-van der Sanden, and Philip van der Wees.
• S.A. van Dulmen, MSc, Radboud University Medical Center, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Internal Code 114, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, the Netherlands. simone.vandulmen@radboudumc.nl.
• Phys Ther. 2014 Oct 1;94(10):1396-409.

BackgroundClinical practice guidelines are considered important instruments to improve quality of care. However, success is dependent on adherence, which may be improved using peer assessment, a strategy in which professionals assess performance of their peers in a simulated setting.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine whether peer assessment is more effective than case-based discussions to improve knowledge and guideline-consistent clinical reasoning in the Dutch physical therapy guideline for low back pain (LBP).DesignA cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted.Setting And ParticipantsTen communities of practice (CoPs) of physical therapists were cluster randomized (N=90): 6 CoPs in the peer-assessment group (n=49) and 4 CoPs in the case-based discussion group (control group) (n=41).InterventionBoth groups participated in 4 educational sessions and used clinical patient cases. The peer-assessment group reflected on performed LBP management in different roles. The control group used structured discussions.MeasurementsOutcomes were assessed at baseline and at 6 months. The primary outcome measure was knowledge and guideline-consistent reasoning, measured with 12 performance indicators using 4 vignettes with specific guideline-related patient profiles. For each participant, the total score was calculated by adding up the percentage scores (0-100) per vignette, divided by 4. The secondary outcome measure was reflective practice, as measured by the Self-Reflection and Insight Scale (20-100).ResultsVignettes were completed by 78 participants (87%). Multilevel analysis showed an increase in guideline-consistent clinical reasoning of 8.4% in the peer-assessment group, whereas the control group showed a decline of 0.1% (estimated group difference=8.7%, 95% confidence interval=3.9 to 13.4). No group differences were found on self-reflection.LimitationsThe small sample size, a short-term follow-up, and the use of vignettes as a proxy for behavior were limitations of the study.ConclusionsPeer assessment leads to an increase in knowledge and guideline-consistent clinical reasoning.© 2014 American Physical Therapy Association.

17 keywords...

hide…