Assessment of Prevalence and Cost of Care Cascades After Routine Testing During the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit

2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from August 2022 to March 2023 to identify clinical studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the "2014 ACC/AHA Guideline on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Management of Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery" have been updated with new evidence consolidated to guide clinicians; clinicians should be advised this guideline supersedes the previously published 2014 guideline. In addition, evidence-based management strategies, including pharmacological therapies, perioperative monitoring, and devices, for cardiovascular disease and associated medical conditions, have been developed.

Medicaid Insurance is Associated With Decreased MRI Use for Ankle Sprains Compared With Private Insurance: A Retrospective Large-database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Advanced imaging modalities are expensive, and access to advanced imaging services may vary by socioeconomic factors, creating the potential for unwarranted variations in care. Ankle sprains are a common injury for which variations in MRI use can occur, both via underuse of indicated MRIs (appropriate use) and overuse of nonindicated MRIs (inappropriate use). High-value, equitable healthcare would decrease inappropriate use and increase appropriate use of MRI for this common injury. It is unknown whether socioeconomic factors are associated with underuse of indicated MRIs and overuse of nonindicated MRIs for ankle sprains.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using ankle sprains as a paradigm injury, given their high population incidence, we asked: (1) Does MRI use for ankle sprains vary by insurance type? (2) After controlling for relevant confounding variables, did patients who received an MRI have higher odds of undergoing ankle surgery?

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2019, a total of 6,710,223 patients were entered into the PearlDiver Mariner Patient Records Database with a diagnosis of ankle sprain. We considered patients with continuous enrollment in the database for at least 1 year before and 2 years after the diagnosis as potentially eligible. Based on that, 68% (4,567,106) were eligible; a further 20% (1,372,478) were excluded because of age younger than 18 years, age at least 65 years with Medicaid insurance, or age < 65 years with Medicare insurance. Another 0.1% (9169) had incomplete data, leaving 47% (3,185,459) for analysis here. Patients with Medicaid insurance differed from patients with Medicare Advantage or private insurance with respect to age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. The primary outcome was ankle MRI occurring within 12 months after diagnosis. The use of ankle surgery after MRI in each cohort was measured as a secondary outcome. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the association between insurance type and MRI use while adjusting for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. Separate multivariable regression models were created to evaluate the association between receiving an MRI and subsequent ankle surgery for each insurance type, adjusting for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden. Within 12 months of an ankle sprain diagnosis, 1% (3522 of 339,457) of patients with Medicaid, 2% (44,793 of 2,627,288) of patients with private insurance, and 1% (1660 of 218,714) of patients with Medicare Advantage received an MRI.

RESULTS

After controlling for age, gender, region, and comorbidity burden, patients with Medicaid had lower odds of receiving an MRI within 12 months after ankle sprain diagnosis than patients with private insurance (odds ratio 0.60 [95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.62]; p < 0.001). Patients with Medicaid who received an MRI had higher adjusted odds of undergoing subsequent ankle surgery (OR 23 [95% CI 21 to 26]; p < 0.001) than patients with private insurance (OR 12.7 [95% CI 12 to 13]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although absolute MRI use was generally low, there was substantial relative variation by insurance type. Given the high incidence of ankle sprains in the general population, these relative differences can translate to tens of thousands of MRIs. Further studies are needed to evaluate the reasons for decreased appropriate MRI use in patients with Medicaid and overuse of MRI in patients with private insurance. The establishment of clinical practice guidelines by orthopaedic professional societies and more stringent gatekeeping for MRI use by health insurers could reduce unwarranted variations in MRI use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Discrepancies Among Hospitals and Regions in the Provision of Low-Value Care

BACKGROUND

Low-value care (LVC) is a critical issue in terms of patient safety and fiscal policy; however, little has been known in Asia. For the purpose of better understanding the extent of LVC on a national level, the utilization, costs, and associated characteristics of selected international recommendations were assessed in this study.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the National Health Insurance (NHI) claims data during 2013-2017 to evaluate the LVC utilization. Adult beneficiaries who enrolled in the NHI program and received at least one of the low-value services in hospitals were included. We measured seven procedures derived from the international recommendations at the hospital level, and a composite measure was created by summing the total utilization of selected services to determine the overall prevalence and corresponding cost. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was adopted to estimate the association.

RESULTS

A total of 1 970 496 episodes of LVC was identified among 1 218 146 beneficiary-year observations and 2054 hospital-year observations. Overall, the utilization rate of the composite measure increased from 150.70 to 186.23 episodes per 10 000 beneficiaries with the growth in cost from US$ 5.40 to US$ 6.90 million. LVC utilization was proportional to the volume of outpatient visits and length of stay. Also, hospitals with a large volume of outpatient visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 95% CI, 2.10: 1.26 to 3.49 for Q2-Q3, 2.88: 1.45 to 5.75 for ≥Q3) and a higher proportion of older patients (aOR: 95% CI, 1.06: 1.02 to 1.11) were more likely to have high costs.

CONCLUSION

The utilization and corresponding cost of LVC appeared to increase annually despite the relatively lower prevalence compared to other countries. Multicomponent interventions such as recommendations, de-implementation policies and payment reforms are considered effective ways to reduce LVC. Repeated measurements would be needed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions.

Accountable Care Organization Leader Perspectives on the Medicare Shared Savings Program: A Qualitative Study

Importance

The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) includes more than 400 accountable care organizations (ACOs) and is among the largest and longest running value-based payment efforts in the US. However, given recent program reforms and other changes in the health care system, the experiences and perspectives of ACO leaders remain incompletely characterized.

Objective

To understand the priorities, strategies, and challenges of ACO leaders in MSSP.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this qualitative study, interviews were conducted with leaders of 49 ACOs of differing sizes, leadership structures, and geographies from MSSP between September 29 and December 29, 2022. Participants were asked about their clinical and care management efforts; how they engaged frontline clinicians; the process by which they distributed shared savings and added or removed practices; and other factors that they believed influenced their success or failure in the program.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Leader perspectives on major themes related to ACO initiatives, performance improvement, and the recruitment, engagement, and retention of clinicians.

Results

Of the 49 ACOs interviewed, 34 were hospital-associated ACOs (69%), 35 were medium or large (>10 000 attributed beneficiaries) (71%), and 17 were rural (35%). The ACOs had a mean (SD) tenure of 8.1 (2.1) years in MSSP. Five major themes emerged: (1) ACO leaders reported a focus on annual wellness visits, coding practices, and care transitions; (2) leaders used both relationship-based and metrics-based strategies to promote clinician engagement; (3) ACOs generally distributed half or more of shared savings to participating practices; (4) ACO recruitment and retention efforts were increasingly influenced by market competition; and (5) some hospital-associated ACOs faced misaligned incentives.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, the ACO leaders reported varied approaches to promoting clinician alignment with ACO goals, an emphasis on increasing annual wellness visits, and new pressures related to growth of other care models. Policymakers hoping to modify or expand the program may wish to incorporate these perspectives into future reforms.

Reducing Care Overuse in Older Patients Using Professional Norms and Accountability : A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Effective strategies are needed to curtail overuse that may lead to harm.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of clinician decision support redirecting attention to harms and engaging social and reputational concerns on overuse in older primary care patients.

DESIGN

18-month, single-blind, pragmatic, cluster randomized trial, constrained randomization. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04289753).

SETTING

60 primary care internal medicine, family medicine and geriatrics practices within a health system from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

371 primary care clinicians and their older adult patients from participating practices.

INTERVENTION

Behavioral science-informed, point-of-care, clinical decision support tools plus brief case-based education addressing the 3 primary clinical outcomes (187 clinicians from 30 clinics) were compared with brief case-based education alone (187 clinicians from 30 clinics). Decision support was designed to increase salience of potential harms, convey social norms, and promote accountability.

MEASUREMENTS

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in men aged 76 years and older without previous prostate cancer, urine testing for nonspecific reasons in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with hypoglycemic agents in patients aged 75 years and older and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) less than 7%.

RESULTS

At randomization, mean clinic annual PSA testing, unspecified urine testing, and diabetes overtreatment rates were 24.9, 23.9, and 16.8 per 100 patients, respectively. After 18 months of intervention, the intervention group had lower adjusted difference-in-differences in annual rates of PSA testing (-8.7 [95% CI, -10.2 to -7.1]), unspecified urine testing (-5.5 [CI, -7.0 to -3.6]), and diabetes overtreatment (-1.4 [CI, -2.9 to -0.03]) compared with education only. Safety measures did not show increased emergency care related to urinary tract infections or hyperglycemia. An HbA1c greater than 9.0% was more common with the intervention among previously overtreated diabetes patients (adjusted difference-in-differences, 0.47 per 100 patients [95% CI, 0.04 to 1.20]).

LIMITATION

A single health system limits generalizability; electronic health data limit ability to differentiate between overtesting and underdocumentation.

CONCLUSION

Decision support designed to increase clinicians' attention to possible harms, social norms, and reputational concerns reduced unspecified testing compared with offering traditional case-based education alone. Small decreases in diabetes overtreatment may also result in higher rates of uncontrolled diabetes.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute on Aging.

Effect of a Peer Comparison and Educational Intervention on Medical Test Conversation Quality: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Medical test overuse and resulting care cascades represent a costly, intractable problem associated with inadequate patient-clinician communication. One possible solution with potential for broader benefits is priming routine, high-quality medical test conversations.

Objective

To assess if a peer comparison and educational intervention for physicians and patients improved medical test conversations during annual visits.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized clinical trial and qualitative evaluation at an academic medical center conducted May 2021 to October 2022. Twenty primary care physicians (PCPs) were matched-pair randomized. For each physician, at least 10 patients with scheduled visits were enrolled. Data were analyzed from December 2022 to September 2023.

Interventions

In the intervention group, physicians received previsit emails that compared their low-value testing rates with those of peer PCPs and included point-of-care-accessible guidance on medical testing; patients received previsit educational materials via email and text message. Control group physicians and patients received general previsit preparation tips.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary patient outcome was the Shared Decision-Making Process survey (SDMP) score. Secondary patient outcomes included medical test knowledge and presence of test conversation. Outcomes were compared using linear regression models adjusted for patient age, gender, race and ethnicity, and education. Poststudy interviews with intervention group physicians and patients were also conducted.

Results

There were 166 intervention group patients and 148 control group patients (mean [SD] patient age, 50.2 [15.3] years; 210 [66.9%] female; 246 [78.3%] non-Hispanic White). Most patients discussed at least 1 test with their physician (95.4% for intervention group; 98.3% for control group; difference, -2.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.0 to 1.2 percentage points). There were no statistically significant differences in SDMP scores (2.11 out of 4 for intervention group; 1.97 for control group; difference, 0.14; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.54) and knowledge scores (2.74 vs 2.54 out of 4; difference, 0.19; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.43). In poststudy interviews with 3 physicians and 16 patients, some physicians said the emails helped them reexamine their testing approach while others noted competing demands. Most patients said they trusted their physicians' advice even when inconsistent with educational materials.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of a physician-facing and patient-facing peer comparison and educational intervention, there was no significant improvement in medical test conversation quality during annual visits. These results suggest that future interventions to improve conversations and reduce overuse and cascades should further address physician adoption barriers and leverage patient-clinician relationships.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04902664.

Who's Accountable? Low-Value Care Received By Medicare Beneficiaries Outside Of Their Attributed Health Systems

Policy makers and payers increasingly hold health systems accountable for spending and quality for their attributed beneficiaries. Low-value care-medical services that offer little or no benefit and have the potential for harm in specific clinical scenarios-received outside of these systems could threaten success on both fronts. Using national Medicare data for fee-for-service beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older and attributed to 595 US health systems, we describe where and from whom they received forty low-value services during 2017-18 and identify factors associated with out-of-system receipt. Forty-three percent of low-value services received by attributed beneficiaries originated from out-of-system clinicians: 38 percent from specialists, 4 percent from primary care physicians, and 1 percent from advanced practice clinicians. Recipients of low-value care were more likely to obtain that care out of system if age 75 or older (versus ages 65-74), male (versus female), non-Hispanic White (versus other races or ethnicities), rural dwelling (versus metropolitan dwelling), more medically complex, or experiencing lower continuity of care. However, out-of-system service receipt was not associated with recipients' health systems' accountable care organization status. Health systems might improve quality and reduce spending for their attributed beneficiaries by addressing out-of-system receipt of low-value care-for example, by improving continuity.

Corporate and industrial form of the organization of health care

In recent history, the functions and forms of health care remain insufficiently analyzed, despite the fact that the incentives invested in medicine determine not only the volume and structure of medical care, but also the reasons for its provision, which are becoming wider, and costs are increasing. The COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the global geopolitical, ideological and economic crisis that emerged in 2022, will require changes in both the structure and economics of the health care system in accordance with its main mission – providing conditions in which people can be healthy.The aim of this article is to analyze the concept of a modern health care system.Materials and methods. Statistical materials of the Russian Research Institute of Health, methods of content analysis, analytical materials of Russian and foreign researchers, including those posted on the Internet, were used.Results. The materials presented in the article allow us to talk about the emergence of a new form of healthcare organization during the life of just one generation of people, where economic incentives are dominant, characteristic of the market and commodity production, the vector of development of which is largely determined by the interests of international financial institutions, clinical corporations, as well as enterprises, manufacturing medical and pharmaceutical products. The expansion of the resource base in this model can occur by attributing epidemic character to certain diseases, as well as by turning social phenomena into medical problems. Therefore, there is always a shortage of resources, and it is not possible to eliminate it without changing the paradigm of the development of the industry and qualified management.Findings. Radical changes in the structure and economics of health care need to be made in line with the industry’s core mission of providing conditions in which people can stay healthy. The basis of these changes is the displacement of market self-regulation and the genesis of a mixed public-private (hybrid) healthcare economy.

Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Test for Prostate Cancer Screening and Subsequent Health Care Utilization and Spending

IMPORTANCE

Delivering low-value care can lead to unnecessary follow-up services and associated costs, and such care cascades have not been well examined in common clinical scenarios.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utilization and costs of care cascades of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests for prostate cancer screening, as the routine use of which among asymptomatic men aged 70 years and older is discouraged by multiple guidelines.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study included men aged 70 years and older without preexisting prostate conditions enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan during January 2016 to December 2018 with at least 1 outpatient visit. Medical billing claims data from the deidentified OptumLabs Data Warehouse were used. Data analysis was conducted from September 2020 to August 2021.

EXPOSURES

At least 1 claim for low-value PSA tests for prostate cancer screening during the observation period.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Utilization of and spending on low-value PSA cancer screening and associated care cascades and the difference in overall health care utilization and spending among individuals receiving low-value PSA cancer screening vs those who did not, adjusting for observed characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Of 995 442 men (mean [SD] age, 78.0 [5.6] years) aged 70 years or older in a Medicare Advantage plan included in this study, 384 058 (38.6%) received a low-value PSA cancer screening. Utilization increased for each subsequent cohort from 2016 to 2018 (49 802 of 168 951 [29.4%] to 134 404 of 349 228 [38.5%] to 199 852 of 477 203 [41.9%]). Among those receiving initial low-value PSA cancer screening, 241 188 of 384 058 (62.8%) received at least 1 follow-up service. Repeated PSA testing was the most common, and 27 268 (7.1%) incurred high-cost follow-up services, such as imaging, radiation therapy, and prostatectomy. Utilization and spending associated with care cascades also increased from 2016 to 2018. For every $1 spent on a low-value PSA cancer screening, an additional $6 was spent on care cascades. Despite avoidable care cascades, individuals who received low-value PSA cancer screening were not associated with increased overall health care utilization and spending during the 1-year follow-up period compared with an unscreened population.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, low-value PSA tests for prostate cancer screening remained prevalent among Medicare Advantage plan enrollees and were associated with unnecessary expenditures due to avoidable care cascades. Innovative efforts from clinicians and policy makers, such as payment reforms, to reduce initial low-value care and avoidable care cascades are warranted to decrease harm, enhance equity, and improve health care efficiency.

Is Low-value Testing Before Low-risk Hand Surgery Associated With Increased Downstream Healthcare Use and Reimbursements? A National Claims Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minor hand procedures can often be completed in the office without any laboratory testing. Preoperative screening tests before minor hand procedures are unnecessary and considered low value because they can lead to preventable invasive confirmatory tests and/or procedures. Prior studies have shown that low-value testing before low-risk hand surgery is still common, yet little is known about their downstream effects and associated costs. Assessing these downstream events can elucidate the consequences of obtaining a low-value test and inform context-specific interventions to reduce their use.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Among healthy adults undergoing low-risk hand surgery, are patients who receive a preoperative low-value test more likely to have subsequent diagnostic tests and procedures than those who do not receive a low-value test? (2) What is the increased 90-day reimbursement associated with subsequent diagnostic tests and procedures in patients who received a low-value test compared with those who did not?

METHODS

In this retrospective, comparative study using a large national database, we queried a large health insurance provider's administrative claims data to identify adult patients undergoing low-risk hand surgery (carpal tunnel release, trigger finger release, Dupuytren fasciectomy, de Quervain release, thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty, wrist ganglion cyst, or mass excision) between 2011 and 2017. This database was selected for its ability to track patient claims longitudinally with direct provision of reimbursement data in a large, geographically diverse patient population. Patients who received at least one preoperative low-value test, including complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, electrocardiogram, chest radiography, pulmonary function test, and urinalysis within the 30-day preoperative period, were matched with propensity scores to those who did not. Among the 73,112 patients who met our inclusion criteria (mean age 57 ± 14 years; 68% [49,847] were women), 27% (19,453) received at least one preoperative low-value test and were propensity score-matched to those who did not. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess the frequency and reimbursements of subsequent diagnostic tests and procedures in the 90 days after surgery while controlling for potentially confounding variables such as age, sex, comorbidities, and baseline healthcare use.

RESULTS

When controlling for covariates such as age, sex, comorbidities, and baseline healthcare use, patients in the low-value test cohort had an adjusted odds ratio of 1.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50 to 1.64; p < 0.001) for a postoperative use event (a downstream diagnostic test or procedure) compared with those who did not have a low-value test. The median (IQR) per-patient reimbursements associated with downstream utilization events in patients who received a low-value test was USD 231.97 (64.37 to 1138.84), and those who did not receive a low-value test had a median of USD 191.52 (57.1 to 899.42) (adjusted difference when controlling for covariates: USD 217.27 per patient [95% CI 59.51 to 375.03]; p = 0.007). After adjusting for inflation, total additional reimbursements for patients in the low-value test cohort increased annually.

CONCLUSION

Low-value tests generate downstream tests and procedures that are known to provide minimal benefit to healthy patients and may expose patients to potential harms associated with subsequent, unnecessary invasive tests and procedures in response to false positives. Nevertheless, low-value testing remains common and the rising trend in low-value test-associated spending demonstrates the need for multicomponent interventions that target change at both the payer and health system level. Such interventions should disincentivize the initial low-value test and the cascade that may follow. Future work to identify the barriers and facilitators to reduce low-value testing in hand surgery can inform the development and revision of deimplementation strategies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Medicare's annual wellness visit: 10 years of opportunities gained and lost

Medicare annual wellness visits (AWV) were initiated 10 years ago. Though AWVs emphasize on disease prevention and health promotion for older adults was a huge step forward, the current "one size fits all" approach does not adequately meet the wellness needs of a diverse population of older adults. Current AWVs do not sufficiently take into consideration the medical, psychological, functional, racial, cultural and socio-economic diversity of older adults. Updated AWVs should be tailored to meet the needs and priorities of older adults receiving them. Several geriatrics approaches to care, including geriatrics Glidepaths and the 4Ms of an Age-Friendly Health System, could help develop and guide a more patient-specific geriatrics focused approach to AWVs. Medicare's IPPE is an ideal time to advise new Medicare beneficiaries regarding what they should and should not do to maximize their ability to be healthy and functionally independent into their 80s, 90s, and 100s.

'Diagnostic downshift': clinical and system consequences of extrapolating secondary care testing tactics to primary care

Numerous drivers push specialist diagnostic approaches down to primary care ('diagnostic downshift'), intuitively welcomed by clinicians and patients. However, primary care's different population and processes result in under-recognised, unintended consequences. Testing performs poorer in primary care, with indication creep due to earlier, more undifferentiated presentation and reduced accuracy due to spectrum bias and the 'false-positive paradox'. In low-prevalence settings, tests without near-100% specificity have their useful yield eclipsed by greater incidental or false-positive findings. Ensuing cascades and multiplier effects can generate clinician workload, patient anxiety, further low-value tests, referrals, treatments and a potentially nocebic population 'disease' burden of unclear benefit. Increased diagnostics earlier in pathways can burden patients and stretch general practice (GP) workloads, inducing downstream service utilisation and unintended 'market failure' effects. Evidence is tenuous for reducing secondary care referrals, providing patient reassurance or meaningfully improving clinical outcomes. Subsequently, inflated investment in per capita testing, at a lower level in a healthcare system, may deliver diminishing or even negative economic returns. Test cost poorly represents 'value', neglecting under-recognised downstream consequences, which must be balanced against therapeutic yield. With lower positive predictive values, more tests are required per true diagnosis and cost-effectiveness is rarely robust. With fixed secondary care capacity, novel primary care testing is an added cost pressure, rarely reducing hospital activity. GP testing strategies require real-world evaluation, in primary care populations, of all downstream consequences. Test formularies should be scrutinised in view of the setting of care, with interventions to focus rational testing towards those with higher pretest probabilities, while improving interpretation and communication of results.

Downstream Mammary and Extramammary Cascade Services and Spending Following Screening Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Mammography Among Commercially Insured Women

Importance

Increasing use of screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including among women at low or average risk of breast cancer, raises concerns about resulting mammary and extramammary cascades (downstream services and new diagnoses) of uncertain value.

Objective

To estimate rates of cascade events (ie, laboratory tests, imaging tests, procedures, visits, hospitalizations, and new diagnoses) and associated spending following screening breast MRI vs mammography among commercially insured US women.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used 2016 to 2018 data from the MarketScan research database (IBM Corporation), which includes claims and administrative data from large US employers and commercial payers. Participants included commercially insured women aged 40 to 64 years without prior breast cancer who received an index bilateral screening breast MRI or mammogram between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018. We used propensity scores based on sociodemographic, clinical, and utilization variables to match MRI recipients to mammogram recipients in each month of index service use. Data were analyzed from October 8, 2020, to October 28, 2021.

Exposures

Breast MRI vs mammography.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mammary and extramammary cascade event rates and associated total and patient out-of-pocket spending in the 6 months following the index test.

Results

In this study, 9208 women receiving breast MRI were matched with 9208 women receiving mammography (mean [SD] age, 51.4 [6.7] years). Compared with mammogram recipients, breast MRI recipients had 39.0 additional mammary cascade events per 100 women (95% CI, 33.7-44.2), including 5.0 additional imaging tests (95% CI, 3.8-6.2), 17.3 additional procedures (95% CI, 15.5-19.0), 13.0 additional visits (95% CI, 9.4-17.2), 0.34 additional hospitalizations (95% CI, 0.18-0.50), and 3.0 additional new diagnoses (95% CI, 2.5-3.6). For extramammary cascades, breast MRI recipients had 19.6 additional events per 100 women (95% CI, 8.6-30.7) including 15.8 additional visits (95% CI, 10.2-21.4) and no statistically significant differences in other events. Breast MRI recipients had higher total spending for mammary events ($564 more per woman; 95% CI, $532-$596), extramammary events ($42 more per woman; 95% CI, $16-$69), and overall ($1404 more per woman; 95% CI, $1172-$1636). They also had higher overall out-of-pocket spending ($31 more per woman; 95% CI, $6-$55).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of commercially insured women, breast MRI was associated with more mammary and extramammary cascade events and spending relative to mammography. These findings can inform cost-benefit assessments and coverage policies to ensure breast MRI is reserved for patients for whom benefits outweigh harms.

Addressing the Drivers of Medical Test Overuse and Cascades: User-Centered Design to Improve Patient-Doctor Communication

BACKGROUND

Low-value medical testing is a major component of health care overuse, both directly and through the potential for borderline and/or incidental results to trigger cascades (downstream services of uncertain value). The costs and harms from marginal test results and their cascades can add up. It is thus important to both prevent low-value tests at the outset and mitigate cascades when they arise.

METHODS

Informed by a framework for understanding and reducing overuse of care, this study employed user-centered design methods (focus groups and 1:1 design meetings) with patients and primary care physicians (PCPs) to understand the problem and iteratively develop an intervention.

RESULTS

Design meetings with 15 PCPs, 12 patients, and 3 patient focus groups revealed myriad drivers for medical test overuse and cascades. Patients commonly believed that all medical tests yield definitive results and lack downsides. PCPs cited expert recommendations, limited time during visits, fear of lawsuits, and desire to be responsive to patients as reasons for ordering potentially low-value medical tests. To address these issues, an intervention was designed using patient pre-visit educational materials, clinician reference materials on test interpretation and incidental findings, and clinician peer comparison on test overuse.

CONCLUSION

Overuse of medical testing is driven by a range of factors related to PCPs, patients, and their interactions. Multipronged interventions may have the potential to address these drivers after they are rigorously tested.

Longitudinal Content Analysis of the Characteristics and Expected Impact of Low-Value Services Identified in US Choosing Wisely Recommendations

IMPORTANCE

The US Choosing Wisely campaign has had substantial reach in mobilizing efforts to reduce low-value care, achieved largely by engaging physician specialty societies in stewardship. While some early recommendations were criticized for avoiding revenue-generating services, there is limited evidence of how the composition of recommendations shifted as more societies contributed.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the characteristics and expected impact of Choosing Wisely recommendations.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study included content and trend analyses of all 626 Choosing Wisely recommendations by US physician societies as of March 1, 2021. Data were analyzed between March and May 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were proportions of identified low-value services by characteristics (society type, service type, indication, do vs avoid, and clinical context) and expected impact (effect on the revenue of society members, cost, number of individuals at risk, direct harm potential, and cascade potential).

RESULTS

Low-value services identified in the 626 Choosing Wisely recommendations largely covered imaging (168 [26.8%]) and laboratory studies (156 [24.9%]) in the context of chronic conditions (169 [27.0%]) and healthy patients with risk factors alone (126 [20.1%]). Most of the identified low-value services were revenue neutral for the recommending society (402 [64.2%]) and the plurality were low cost (<$200; 284 [45.4%]); low-cost services represented a growing share of low-value services identified by Choosing Wisely recommendations (1.2 percentage points per year; P = .001). Nearly half (280 [44.7%]) of recommendations identified services with high direct harm potential, and 388 (62.0%) identified those with high potential for cascades (ie, triggering downstream services).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this qualitative study suggest that the Choosing Wisely recommendations identified services with a range of expected impacts. Stakeholders could explicitly set priorities for future recommendations, while clinical leaders and payers might target intervention efforts on recommendations with the greatest potential for impact based on spending across populations, direct harms, and cascades.