Impacto económico de la variabilidad clínica en la petición de pruebas preoperatorias en cirugía mayor ambulatoria

Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Imaging with low or no benefit for the patient undermines the quality of care and amounts to vast opportunity costs. More than 3.6 billion imaging examinations are performed annually, and about 20-50% of these are of low value. This study aimed to synthesize knowledge of the costs of low-value imaging worldwide.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement. The database search was developed in Medline and further adapted to Embase-Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Primary empirical studies assessing the costs of low-value diagnostic imaging were included if published between 2012 and March 2022. Studies designed as randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive studies, cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and mixed-methods studies were eligible. The analysis was descriptive.

RESULTS

Of 5,567 records identified, 106 were included. Most of the studies included were conducted in the USA (n = 76), and a hospital or medical center was the most common setting (n = 82). Thirty-eight of the included studies calculated the costs of multiple imaging modalities; in studies with only one imaging modality included, conventional radiography was the most common (n = 32). Aggregated costs for low-value examinations amounts to billions of dollars per year globally. Initiatives to reduce low-value imaging may reduce costs by up to 95% without harming patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first systematic review of the cost of low-value imaging worldwide, documenting a high potential for cost reduction. Given the universal challenges with resource allocation, the large amount used for low-value imaging represents a vast opportunity cost and offers great potential to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Recommendations on Testing Before Outpatient Dermatologic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Short-duration ambulatory surgery for the removal of skin tumors under local anesthesia is increasingly common in dermatology. Preoperative assessment has traditionally targeted the identification of any unknown diseases or other health conditions that might lead to changes in plans for anesthesia or surgery. Hospitals and specialists differ greatly in the tests they order in patients about to undergo outpatient dermatologic surgery given that hardly any finding would be likely to contraindicate or lead to changes in the procedure. This study aimed to provide guidance for those ordering tests before outpatient dermatologic surgery.

METHODS

In 2017 our hospital developed a protocol to standardize preoperative testing for outpatient dermatologic surgery. We designed an observational, descriptive, retrospective analysis of tests ordered for patients scheduled for such surgery before and after the protocol was applied.

RESULTS

Fewer tests were ordered after the protocol was introduced. We detected no statistically significant differences in relation to type of surgery planned or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients about to undergo outpatient dermatologic surgery under local anesthesia who have no unusual health risks may not require preoperative testing.

"Do not do" recommendations of the Spanish Society of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Therapy. "Commitment to Quality by Scientific Societies" Project

In April 2013 the Ministry of Health (MSSSI) adopted the project called "Commitment to Quality by Scientific Societies in Spain", in response to social and professional demands for sustainability of the health system. The initiative is part of the activities of the Spanish Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment and Services of the National Health System, and is coordinated jointly by the Quality and Cohesion Department, the Aragon Institute of Health Sciences (IACS), and the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI). All the scientific societies in Spain have been included in this project, and its main objective is to reduce the unnecessary use of health interventions in order to agree "do not do" recommendations, based on scientific evidence. The primary objective was to identify interventions that have not proven effective, have limited or doubtful effectiveness, are not cost-effective, or do not have priority. Secondary objectives were: reducing variability in clinical practice, to spread information between doctors and patients to guide decision-making, the appropriate use of health resources and, the promotion of clinical safety and reducing iatrogenesis. The selection process of the 5 "do not do" recommendations was made by Delphi methodology. A total of 25 panellists (all anaesthesiologists) chose between 15 proposals based on: evidence that supports quality, relevance, or clinical impact, and the people they affect. The 5 recommendations proposed were: Do not maintain deep levels of sedation in critically ill patients without a specific indication; Do not perform preoperative chest radiography in patients under 40 years-old with ASA physical status I or II; Do not systematically perform preoperative tests in cataract surgery unless otherwise indicated based on clinical history and physical examination; Do not perform elective surgery in patients with anaemia at risk of bleeding until a diagnostic workup is performed and treatment is given; and not perform laboratory tests (blood count, biochemistry and coagulation) prior to surgery in healthy or low risk patients (ASA I and II) with minimal estimated blood loss.