Barriers and facilitators to adopting high value practices and de-adopting low value practices in Canadian intensive care units: a multimethod study

Machine learning-based prediction of low-value care for hospitalized patients

Objective

Low-value care (i.e., costly health care treatments that provide little or no benefit) is an ongoing problem in United States hospitals. Traditional strategies for reducing low-value care are only moderately successful. Informed by behavioral science principles, we sought to use machine learning to inform a targeted prompting system that suggests preferred alternative treatments at the point of care but before clinicians have made a decision.

Methods

We used intravenous administration of albumin for fluid resuscitation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients as an exemplar of low-value care practice, identified using the electronic health record of a multi-hospital health system. We divided all ICU episodes into 4-h periods and defined a set of relevant clinical features at the period level. We then developed two machine learning models: a single-stage model that directly predicts if a patient will receive albumin in the next period; and a two-stage model that first predicts if any resuscitation fluid will be administered and then predicts albumin only among the patients with a high probability of fluid use.

Results

We examined 87,489 ICU episodes divided into approximately 1.5 million 4-h periods. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86 for both prediction models. The positive predictive value was 0.21 (95% confidence interval: 0.20, 0.23) for the single-stage model and 0.22 (0.20, 0.23) for the two-stage model. Applying either model in a targeted prompting system could prevent 10% of albumin administrations, with an attending physician receiving one prompt every 4.2 days of ICU service.

Conclusion

Prediction of low-value care is feasible and could enable a point-of-care, targeted prompting system that offers suggestions ahead of the moment of need before clinicians have already decided. A two-stage approach does not improve performance but does interject new levers for the calibration of such a system.

Improving adherence to guidelines for spine pain care: what tools could support primary care clinicians in conforming to guidelines?

Background

Spine pain is one of the most common conditions seen in primary care and is often treated with ineffective, aggressive interventions, such as prescription pain medications, imagery and referrals to surgery. Aggressive treatments are associated with negative side effects and high costs while conservative care has lower risks and costs and equivalent or better outcomes. Despite multiple well-publicised treatment guidelines and educational efforts recommending conservative care, primary care clinicians (PCCs) widely continue to prescribe aggressive, low-value care for spine pain.

Methods

In this qualitative study semistructured interviews were conducted with PCCs treating spine pain patients to learn what prevents clinicians from following guidelines and what tools or support could promote conservative care. Interviews were conducted by telephone, transcribed and coded for thematic analysis.

Results

Forty PCCs in academic and private practice were interviewed. Key reflections included that while familiar with guidelines recommending conservative treatment, they did not find guidelines useful or relevant to care decisions for individual patients. They believed that there is an insufficient body of real-world evidence supporting positive outcomes for conservative care and guidance recommendations. They indicated that spine pain patients frequently request aggressive care. These requests, combined with the PCCs’ commitment to reaching shared treatment decisions with patients, formed a key reason for pursuing aggressive care. PCCs reported not being familiar with risk-screening tools for spine patients but indicated that such screens might increase their confidence to recommend conservative care to low-risk patients.

Conclusions

PCCs may be more willing to give conservative, guideline-consistent care for spine pain if they had tools to assist in making patient-specific evaluations and in countering requests for unneeded aggressive care. Such tools would include both patient risk screens and shared decision-making aids that include elements for resolving patient demands for inappropriate care.

Patient and family involvement in Choosing Wisely initiatives: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Patients are important stakeholders in reducing low-value care, yet mechanisms for optimizing their involvement in low-value care remain unclear. To explore the role of patients in the development and implementation of Choosing Wisely recommendations to reduce low-value care and to assess the likelihood that existing patient resources will change patient health behaviour.

METHODS

Three phased mixed-methods study: 1) content analysis of all publicly available Choosing Wisely clinician lists and patient resources from the United States of America and Canada. Quantitative data was summarized with frequencies and free text comments were analyzed with qualitative thematic content analysis; 2) semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of representatives of professional societies who created Choosing Wisely clinician lists and members of the public (including patients and family members). Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and two researchers conducted qualitative template analysis; 3) evaluation of Choosing Wisely patient resources. Two public partners were identified through the Calgary Critical Care Research Network and independently answered two free text questions "would this change your health behaviour" and "would you discuss this material with a healthcare provider". Free text data was analyzed by two researchers using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

From the content analysis of 136 Choosing Wisely clinician lists, six reported patient involvement in their development. From 148 patient resource documents that were mapped onto a conceptual framework (Inform, Activate, Collaborate) 64% described patient engagement at the level of Inform (educating patients). From 19 interviews stakeholder perceptions of patient involvement in reducing low-value care were captured by four themes: 1) impact of perceived power dynamics on the discussion of low-value care in the clinical interaction, 2) how to communicate about low-value care, 3) perceived barriers to patient involvement in reducing low-value care, and 4) suggested strategies to engage patients and families in Choosing Wisely initiatives. In the final phase of work in response to the question "would this change your health behaviour" two patient partners agreed 'yes' on 27% of patient resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunities exist to increase patient and family participation in initiatives to reduce low-value care.

Inappropriate use of clinical practices in Canada: a systematic review

Background:

Inappropriate health care leads to negative patient experiences, poor health outcomes and inefficient use of resources. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada.

Methods:

We searched multiple bibliometric databases and grey literature to identify inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada between 2007 and 2021. Two team members independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Findings were synthesized in 2 categories: diagnostics and therapeutics. We reported ranges of proportions of inappropriate use for all practices. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), based on the percentage of patients not receiving recommended practices (underuse) or receiving practices not recommended (overuse), were calculated. All statistics are at the study summary level.

Results:

We included 174 studies, representing 228 clinical practices and 28 900 762 patients. The median proportion of inappropriate care, as assessed in the studies, was 30.0% (IQR 12.0%–56.6%). Underuse (median 43.9%, IQR 23.8%–66.3%) was more frequent than overuse (median 13.6%, IQR 3.2%–30.7%). The most frequently investigated diagnostics were glycated hemoglobin (underused, range 18.0%–85.7%, n = 9) and thyroid-stimulating hormone (overused, range 3.0%–35.1%, n = 5). The most frequently investigated therapeutics were statin medications (underused, range 18.5%–71.0%, n = 6) and potentially inappropriate medications (overused, range 13.5%–97.3%, n = 9).

Interpretation:

We have provided a summary of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canadian health care systems. Our findings can be used to support health care professionals and quality agencies to improve patient care and safety in Canada.

Association of Fluoroquinolone Prescribing Rates With Black Box Warnings from the US Food and Drug Administration

IMPORTANCE

In 2013 and 2016, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued warnings and recommended limited use of fluoroquinolones for patients with certain acute conditions. It is not clear how prescribers have responded to these warnings.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze changes in prescribing of fluoroquinolones after the 2013 and 2016 FDA warnings and to examine the physician characteristics associated with these changes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used Medicare administrative claims data on Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries and OneKey data on physicians and their organizations from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017. The sample was restricted to outpatient visits for sinusitis, bronchitis, and uncomplicated urinary tract infections. An interrupted time series approach was used to analyze the changes in the prescription rate after each FDA warning. Data analysis was performed between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Two FDA black box warnings released in August 2013 and July 2016.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was an indicator for fluoroquinolone prescriptions in 3 periods: before the 2013 warning (baseline period), after the 2013 warning but before the 2016 warning (postwarning period 1), and after the 2016 warning (postwarning period 2).

RESULTS

The sample comprised 1 238 397 unique patients with a total of 2 720 071 outpatient acute care visits. Of this sample, 848 360 were women (68.5%), and the mean (SD) age was 69.7 (12.6) years. The immediate prescribing levels of fluoroquinolones in postwarning period 1 increased by 3.42 percentage points (95% CI, 3.23-3.62; P < .001) and declined by -0.77 percentage points (95% CI, -1.00 to -0.54; P < .001) in postwarning period 2. The prescribing trend increased by 0.08 percentage points per month (95% CI, 0.08-0.10; P < .001) in postwarning period 1 and 0.06 percentage points per month (95% CI, 0.04-0.08; P < .001) in postwarning period 2. In postwarning period 1, the prescribing levels for physicians who were affiliated with hospitals with a top 10th percentile case mix index vs those without such affiliation decreased by -1.13 percentage points (95% CI, -1.92 to -0.34; P = .005), whereas the levels for primary care physicians declined by -1.34 percentage points (95% CI, -1.78 to -0.88; P < .001) compared with non-primary care physicians in postwarning period 2. Physicians at teaching hospitals were the only ones who showed a decline in prescribing trend in postwarning period 1.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cross-sectional study found an overall decline in prescribing of fluoroquinolones after the release of FDA warnings. Understanding the association of physician and organizational characteristics with fluoroquinolone prescribing behavior may ultimately help to identify mechanisms to improve de-adoption.

De-implementing and sustaining an intervention to eliminate nursing home resident bed and chair alarms: interviews on leadership and staff perspectives

Background

Improving nursing home quality of care relies partly on reducing or stopping ineffective or harmful practices, a process known as de-implementation. We know little about de-implementation in this setting. Relatively recent policy changes reclassified resident position-change (bed and chair) alarms, which monitor resident movement, as restraints. This created an optimal environment in which to study impressions of an alarm de-implementation and sustainment intervention.

Methods

This cross-sectional interview study focused on understanding participants’ experience of a quality improvement program in the Department of Veterans Affairs Community Living Centers (nursing homes). The program’s goal was to improve resident outcomes and staff communication and teamwork through, among other foci, eliminating resident position-change alarms. The Community Living Centers were located in geographically dispersed areas of the continental United States. Interview participants were leadership and staff members from seven Community Living Centers. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews using a convenience sample and used a thematic analytic approach.

Results

We conducted seventeen interviews. We identified five main themes: Initiating De-implementation (compelling participants with evidence, engaging local leadership, and site-level education and training), Changing Expectations (educating staff and family members), Using Contrasting Approaches (gradual or abrupt elimination of alarms), Witnessing Positive Effects of De-implementation (reduction in resident falls, improved resident sleep, reduction in distressing behaviors, and increased resident engagement), and Staying the Course (sustainment of the initiative).

Conclusions

Findings highlight how participants overcame barriers and successfully eliminated resident position-change alarms and sustained the de-implementation through using convincing evidence for the initiative, local leadership involvement and support, and staff and family member education and engagement. These findings and the resulting three-phase process to support nursing homes' de-implementation efforts expand the de-implementation science knowledge base and provide a promising framework for other nursing home-based de-implementation initiatives.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-021-00195-w.

Thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients: balancing on a tightrope

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a common and potentially fatal complication in the intensive care unit (ICU). Critically ill patients have some special characteristics that increase the risk for VTE and complicate risk stratification and diagnosis. Given the positive effect of thromboprophylaxis on main outcomes, its use is mandatory in these patients, which is documented by various studies and recommended by all published guidelines. However, anticoagulation management is not an easy issue in clinical practice, as the critical patient may be at high risk for thrombosis or, conversely, at increased risk of bleeding or may balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk. Thrombotic and bleeding risk scoring should be evaluated daily in order to select the appropriate form of thromboprophylaxis. The selection depends on the degree of bleeding risk and the subgroup of ICU patients involved, such as patients with sepsis, acute brain injury, major trauma or coronavirus disease-2019. If there is no bleeding risk or other contraindication, the patient should receive pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparins, weighing the advantages of each agent. If the patient is at high risk of bleeding or there is a contraindication to pharmacologic prophylaxis, he should receive mechanical thromboprophylaxis mainly with intermittent pneumatic compression or graduated compression stockings. Thromboprophylaxis compliance with the guidelines is a prerequisite for moving from theory to practice. Direct oral anticoagulants have been studied in ICU patients and have no place at present in VTE prophylaxis requiring further research.

Internal barriers to efficiency: why disinvestments are so difficult. Identifying and addressing internal barriers to disinvestment of health technologies

Although efficiency is a core concept in health economics, its impact on health care practice still is modest. Despite an increased pressure on resource allocation, a widespread use of low-value care is identified. Nonetheless, disinvestments are rare. Why is this so? This is the key question of this paper: why are disinvestments not more prevalent and improving the efficiency of the health care system, given their sound foundation in health economics, their morally important rationale, the significant evidence for a long list of low-value care and available alternatives? Although several external barriers to disinvestments have been identified, this paper looks inside us for mental mechanisms that hamper rational assessment, implementation, use and disinvestment of health technologies. Critically identifying and assessing internal inclinations, such as cognitive biases, affective biases and imperatives, is the first step toward a more rational handling of health technologies. In order to provide accountable and efficient care we must engage in the quest against the figments of our minds; to disinvest in low-value care in order to provide high-value health care.

Deadoption of low-value practices in the ICU

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Change of practice in the ICU, particularly the discontinuation of approaches, which are no longer felt to be beneficial, can be challenging. This review will examine this issue and outline current thinking regarding how to best approach it.

RECENT FINDINGS

Practices in medicine that do not provide patients benefit and possibly cause harm exist throughout medicine and are called low-value practices. Some low-value practices have successfully been removed from the ICU whereas others remain. The process of removing these practices from established care is often called deadoption. Low-value practices that are simply ineffective but produce comparatively less harm or cost, may represent a significant challenge to deadoption. Additionally, although no single intervention has been identified as the preferred method of deadoption of a low-value practice, we advocate for a multimodal approach.

SUMMARY

Deadoption in the intensive care unit of practices that either cause harm or are significantly costly relative to their benefit remains an elusive goal. Attempts at deadoption should target local ICU circumstances, while still encompassing the spectrum of care outside the ICU, engage nursing more fully, promote the use of local champions, especially peers, and recognize the requirement to seek sustainability.

Use of intravenous magnesium sulfate among patients with acute myocardial infarction in China from 2001 to 2015: China PEACE-Retrospective AMI Study

OBJECTIVE

In 2001, Chinese guidelines for the care of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) included a new recommendation against the routine use of magnesium. We studied temporal trends and institutional variation in the use of intravenous magnesium sulfate in nationally representative samples of individuals hospitalised with AMI in China between 2001 and 2015.

METHODS

In an observational study (China PEACE-Retrospective Study) of AMI care, we used a two-stage, random sampling strategy to create a nationally representative sample of 28 208 patients with AMI at 162 Chinese hospitals in 2001, 2006, 2011 and 2015. The main outcome is use of intravenous magnesium sulfate over time.

RESULTS

We identified 24 418 patients admitted for AMI, without hypokalaemia, in the four study years. Over time, there was a significant initial decrease in intravenous magnesium sulfate use, from 32.1% in 2001 to 17.1% in 2015 (p<0.001 for trend). The decline was greater in the Eastern (from 33.3% to 16.5%) and Western (from 34.8% to 17.2%) regions, as compared with the Central region (from 25.9% to 18.1%), with little difference between rural and urban areas. The proportion of hospitals using intravenous magnesium sulfate did not change over time (from 81.3% to 77.9%). The median ORs, representing hospital-level variation, were 6.03 in 2001, 3.86 in 2006, 4.26 in 2011 and 4.72 in 2015. Intravenous magnesium sulfate use was associated with cardiac arrest at admission and receipt of reperfusion therapy, but no hospital-specific characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recommendations against its use, intravenous magnesium sulfate is used in about one in six patients with AMI in China. Our findings highlight the need for more efficient mechanisms to stop using ineffective therapies to improve patients' outcomes and reduce medical waste.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01624883).

Impact of a Program to Improve Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis on Incidence of Thromboembolism and Bleeding Rates in Hospitalized Patients During Implementation of Programs to Improve Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis

Objective

To study the impact of multiphase quality improvement efforts to enhance appropriate use of chemical and mechanical venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (VTEP) on the rate of hospital-acquired VTE and determine whether efforts have been associated with increased bleeding complications.

Patients and Methods

All adult inpatients discharged between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, were included in the study. Retrospective interrupted time series analysis compared VTEP performance, VTE outcomes, and unintended consequences (derived from linked administrative and clinical data) across 5 improvement phases: baseline (January 1, 2005-December 31, 2006), paper order set phase (January 1, 2007-February 9, 2009), electronic order set phase (February 10, 2009-December 16, 2009), active reminder phase (December 17, 2009-May 31, 2012), and maintenance phase (June 1, 2012-September 30, 2015).

Results

Guideline VTEP plan adherence at the end of the study period (including documenting contraindications) reached 88.8% (654,138 of 736,384 patient days). Delivery of pharmacological VTEP increased from 43.9% (49,155 of 111,906 patients) to 60.8% (75,784 of 124,676 patients); delivery of mechanical or pharmacological VTEP increased less (65.0% [431,791 of 664,087 patient days] to 67.4% [496,625 of 736,384 patient days]). Mean VTE rates decreased from 4.6 per 1000 hospitalizations (21.7 VTEs per month) at baseline to 4.3 per 1000 hospitalizations (18.0 VTEs per month) during the maintenance phase (P<.001). More than 97% of patients who had development of VTE (534 of 548) received VTEP, but 65.7% (360 of 548) experienced gaps of 1 or more days in VTEP delivery. Measured in-hospital bleeding rates were fairly consistent over the study (4.6% [5,198 of 111,906 patients] at baseline to 5.3% [6,662 of 124,676 patients] during the reminder phase). There was little change in rates of 7-day readmission with bleeding or VTE.

Conclusion

Our VTEP project improved guideline compliance, increased the proportion of patients receiving VTEP, and was associated with a decrease in VTE. Gaps in VTEP delivery occurred despite protocoled order sets and electronic feedback. Further improvements in VTE may require new approaches.

A multicentre controlled pre-post trial of an implementation science intervention to improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in critically ill patients

PURPOSE

To test whether a multicomponent intervention would increase the use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over unfractionated heparin (UFH) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients and change patient outcomes and healthcare utilization.

METHODS

Controlled pre-post trial of 12,342 adults admitted to 11 ICUs (five intervention, six control) May 1, 2015 to April 30, 2017 with no contraindication to pharmacological prophylaxis and an ICU stay longer than 24 h. Models were developed to examine temporal changes in ICU VTE prophylaxis (primary outcome), VTE, major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), death and hospital costs.

RESULTS

The use of LMWH increased from 45.9% to 78.3% of patient days in the intervention group and from 37.9% to 53.3% in the control group, an absolute increase difference of 17.0% (32.4% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.001). Changes in the administration of UFH were inversely related to those of LMWH. There were no significant differences in the adjusted odds of VTE (ratio of odds ratios [rOR] 1.13, 95% CI 0.51-2.46) or major bleeding (rOR 1.22, 95% CI 0.97-1.54) post-implementation of the intervention (compared to pre-implementation) between the intervention group and the control group. HIT was uncommon in both groups (n = 20 patients). There were no significant changes for ICU and hospital mortality, length of stay and costs. Results were similar when stratified according to reason for ICU admission, patient weight and kidney function.

CONCLUSIONS

A multicomponent intervention changed practice, but not clinical and economic outcomes. The benefit of implementing LMWH for VTE prophylaxis under real-world conditions is uncertain.