Two intervention types, the specialist epilepsy nurse and self-management education, have some evidence of benefit. However, we did not find clear evidence that other service models substantially improve outcomes for adults with epilepsy. It is also possible that benefits are situation specific and may not generalise to other settings. These studies included only a small number of service providers whose individual competence or expertise may have had a significant impact on outcomes. At present it is not possible to advocate any single model of service provision.
Implementation strategies for a Scottish national epilepsy guideline in primary care: results of the Tayside Implementation of Guidelines in Epilepsy Randomized (TIGER) trial.
To determine the effectiveness of two dissemination and implementation strategies to implement a national guideline for epilepsy management in primary care settings.
                Three-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial. The participants were general practitioners from 68 practices in Tayside, Scotland, and 1,133 of their patients with self-reported epilepsy treated with antiepileptic medications (AEDs). Practices were randomized blind to a control, intermediate, or intensive intervention. Control: Postal dissemination of a nationally developed clinical guideline. Intermediate intervention: Postal dissemination of the guideline supported by interactive, accredited workshops, and dedicated, structured protocol documents. Intensive intervention: Intermediate intervention plus a nurse specialist who supported and educated practices in the establishment of epilepsy review clinics. The primary outcome was the SF-36 health-related quality-of-life instrument. Secondary measures were a battery of prevalidated epilepsy-specific quality-of-life instruments. These were administered at baseline and after the intervention phase. Process of care was assessed by case-note review on number of review meetings and counseling sessions for epilepsy before and after the interventions.
                None of the intervention groups showed any change in the primary or secondary outcome measures or process-of-care measures.
                None of the intervention strategies led to improvements in patient quality of life or quality of epilepsy care. Further research is needed to discover why the interventions failed, to identify barriers to adoption of guidelines, and to develop strategies that might improve implementation and uptake in the future.