Recommendations for the Use of Audit and Feedback to De-Implement Low-Value Care

Implementation Strategies to Promote Short-Course Radiation for Bone Metastases

Importance

For patients with nonspine bone metastases, short-course radiotherapy (RT) can reduce patient burden without sacrificing clinical benefit. However, there is great variation in uptake of short-course RT across practice settings.

Objective

To evaluate whether a set of 3 implementation strategies facilitates increased adoption of a consensus recommendation to treat nonspine bone metastases with short-course RT (ie, ≤5 fractions).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized quality improvement study was conducted at 3 community-based cancer centers within an existing academic-community partnership. Rollout was initiated in 3-month increments between October 2021 and May 2022. Participants included treating physicians and patients receiving RT for nonspine bone metastases. Data analysis was performed from October 2022 to May 2023.

Exposures

Three implementation strategies-(1) dissemination of published consensus guidelines, (2) personalized audit-and-feedback reports, and (3) an email-based electronic consultation platform (eConsult)-were rolled out to physicians.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was adherence to the consensus recommendation of short-course RT for nonspine bone metastases. Mixed-effects logistic regression at the bone metastasis level was used to model associations between the exposure of physicians to the set of strategies (preimplementation vs postimplementation) and short-course RT, while accounting for patient and physician characteristics and calendar time, with a random effect for physician. Physician surveys were administered before implementation and after implementation to assess feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of each strategy.

Results

Forty-five physicians treated 714 patients (median [IQR] age at treatment start, 67 [59-75] years; 343 women [48%]) with 838 unique nonspine bone metastases during the study period. Implementing the set of strategies was not associated with use of short-course RT (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.45-1.34; P = .40), with unadjusted adherence rates of 53% (444 lesions) preimplementation vs 56% (469 lesions) postimplementation; however, the adjusted odds of adherence increased with calendar time (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.20-2.36; P = .003). All 3 implementation strategies were perceived as being feasible, acceptable, and appropriate; only the perception of audit-and-feedback appropriateness changed before vs after implementation (19 of 29 physicians [66%] vs 27 of 30 physicians [90%]; P = .03, Fisher exact test), with 20 physicians (67%) preferring reports quarterly.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this quality improvement study, a multicomponent set of implementation strategies was not associated with increased use of short-course RT within an academic-community partnership. However, practice improved with time, perhaps owing to secular trends or physician awareness of the study. Audit-and-feedback was more appropriate than anticipated. Findings support the need to investigate optimal approaches for promoting evidence-based radiation practice across settings.

Methodological progress note: De-implementation of low-value care

De-implementation is the process of reducing or stopping the use of ineffective, harmful, or low-value healthcare services that provide little or no benefit to patients. This article reviews relevant frameworks for planning and evaluating de-implementation initiatives, describes unique barriers, and provides effective strategies for de-implementation in Hospital Medicine.

Implementing an audit and feedback cycle to improve adherence to the Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations: clustered randomized trail

BACKGROUND

Audit and Feedback (A&F), a strategy aimed at promoting modified practice through performance feedback, is a method to change provider behaviour and reduce unnecessary medical services. This study aims to assess the use of A&F to reduce antibiotic prescribing for viral infections and antipsychotic prescribing to patients with dementia.

METHODS

Clustered randomized trial of 239 primary care providers in Manitoba, Canada, participating in the Manitoba Primary Care Research Network. Forty-six practices were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control group, intervention 1 (recommendations summary), intervention 2 (recommendations summary and personalized feedback). We assessed prescribing rates prior to the intervention (2014/15), during and immediately after the intervention (2016/17) and following the intervention (2018/19). Physician characteristics were assessed.

RESULTS

Between 2014/15-2016/17, 91.6% of providers in intervention group 1 and 95.9% of providers in intervention group 2 reduced their antibiotic and antipsychotic prescribing rate by ≥ 1 compared to the control group (77.6%) (p-value 0.0073). This reduction was maintained into 2018/19 at 91.4%. On multivariate regression alternatively funded providers had 2.4 × higher odds of reducing their antibiotic prescribing rate compared to fee-for-service providers. In quantile regression of providers with a reduction in antibiotic prescribing, alternatively funded (e.g. salaried or locum) providers compared to fee-for-service providers were significant at the 80^th quantile.

CONCLUSIONS

Both A&F and recommendation summaries sent to providers by a trusted source reduced unnecessary prescriptions. Our findings support further scale up of efforts to engage with primary care practices to improve care with A&F.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05385445, retrospectively registered, 23/05/2022.

Promoting de-implementation of inappropriate antimicrobial use in cardiac device procedures by expanding audit and feedback: protocol for hybrid III type effectiveness/implementation quasi-experimental study

Background

Despite a strong evidence base and clinical guidelines specifically recommending against prolonged post-procedural antimicrobial use, studies indicate that the practice is common following cardiac device procedures. Formative evaluations conducted by the study team suggest that inappropriate antimicrobial use may be driven by information silos that drive provider belief that antimicrobials are not harmful, in part due to lack of complete feedback about all types of clinical outcomes. De-implementation is recognized as an important area of research that can lead to reductions in unnecessary, wasteful, or harmful practices, such as excess antimicrobial use following cardiac device procedures; however, investigations into strategies that lead to successful de-implementation are limited. The overarching hypothesis to be tested in this trial is that a bundle of implementation strategies that includes audit and feedback about direct patient harms caused by inappropriate prescribing can lead to successful de-implementation of guideline-discordant care.

Methods

We propose a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation stepped-wedge intervention trial at three high-volume, high-complexity VA medical centers. The main study intervention (an informatics-based, real-time audit-and-feedback tool) was developed based on learning/unlearning theory and formative evaluations and guided by the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) Framework. Elements of the bundled and multifaceted implementation strategy to promote appropriate prescribing will include audit-and-feedback reports that include information about antibiotic harms, stakeholder engagement, patient and provider education, identification of local champions, and blended facilitation. The primary study outcome is adoption of evidence-based practice (de-implementation of inappropriate antimicrobial use). Clinical outcomes (cardiac device infections, acute kidney injuries and Clostridioides difficile infections) are secondary. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, fidelity, feasibility).

Discussion

De-implementation theory suggests that factors that may have a particularly strong influence on de-implementation include strength of the underlying evidence, the complexity of the intervention, and patient and provider anxiety and fear about changing an established practice. This study will assess whether a multifaceted intervention mapped to identified de-implementation barriers leads to measurable improvements in provision of guideline-concordant antimicrobial use. Findings will improve understanding about factors that impact successful or unsuccessful de-implementation of harmful or wasteful healthcare practices.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT05020418

Protocol for DRAUP: a deimplementation programme to decrease routine chest radiographs after central venous catheter insertion

Introduction

Avoiding low value medical practices is an important focus in current healthcare utilisation. Despite advantages of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) over chest X-ray including improved workflow and timeliness of results, POCUS-guided central venous catheter (CVC) position confirmation has slow rate of adoption. This demonstrates a gap that is ripe for the development of an intervention.

Methods

The intervention is a deimplementation programme called DRAUP (deimplementation of routine chest radiographs after adoption of ultrasound-guided insertion and confirmation of central venous catheter protocol) that will be created to address one unnecessary imaging modality in the acute care environment. We propose a three-phase approach to changing low-value practices. In phase 1, we will be guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research framework to explore barriers and facilitators of POCUS for CVC confirmation in a single centre, large tertiary, academic hospital via focus groups. The qualitative methods will inform the development and adaptation of strategies that address identified determinants of change. In phase 2, the multifaceted strategies will be conceptualised using Morgan’s framework for understanding and reducing medical overuse. In phase 3, we will locally implement these strategies and assess them using Proctor’s outcomes (adoption, deadoption, fidelity and penetration) in an observational study to demonstrate proof of concept, gaining valuable insights on the programme. Secondary outcomes will include POCUS-guided CVC confirmation efficacy measured by time and effectiveness measured by sensitivity and specificity of POCUS confirmation after CVC insertion.

With limited data available to inform interventions that use concurrent implementation and deimplementation strategies to substitute chest X-ray for POCUS using the DRAUP programme, we propose that this primary implementation and secondary effectiveness pilot study will provide novel data that will expand the knowledge of implementation approaches to replacing low value or unnecessary care in acute care environments.

Ethics and dissemination

Approval of the study by the Human Research Protection Office has been obtained. This work will be disseminated by publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts, presentation in abstract form at scientific meetings and data sharing with other investigators through academically established means.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT04324762, registered on 27 March 2020.

Factors influencing uptake of evidence-based antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines for electrophysiology procedures

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines support early discontinuation of antimicrobials after cardiac device procedures; however, prolonged courses of antimicrobials are common.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 13 electrophysiologists representing diverse geographic and clinical settings of care to identify perceived barriers and facilitators to discontinuing postprocedure antimicrobial prophylaxis as part of a formative evaluation prior to implementing a program to improve uptake of guideline recommendations. A directed content analysis approach was used to map responses to the Implementation Outcomes Framework.

RESULTS

Data indicated that electrophysiologists were not willing to stop postprocedural antimicrobials, indicating a lack of acceptability of clinical guidelines. Feasibility, fidelity, cost, and appropriateness were also frequently cited. Factors associated with prolonged antimicrobial prescribing included beliefs about lack of harm and possible benefit. There was a strong "cultural inertia" to conform to institutional normative practices. Reasons for conforming ranged from streamlining processes for clinical staff and concerns about being perceived as an "outlier."

CONCLUSIONS

Institutional culture and beliefs about consequences of cardiac device infections versus antimicrobial use appeared to be major drivers of current practice. The desire to promote institutional standardization suggests that strategies to enhance implementation of prophylaxis guidelines must include facility-level changes, rather than interventions directed only at individual-providers.

Factors Influencing Primary Care Providers' Unneeded Lumbar Spine MRI Orders for Acute, Uncomplicated Low-Back Pain: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines suggest that magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine (LS-MRI) is unneeded during the first 6 weeks of acute, uncomplicated low-back pain. Unneeded LS-MRIs do not improve patient outcomes, lead to unnecessary surgeries and procedures, and cost the US healthcare system about $300 million dollars per year. However, why primary care providers (PCPs) order unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize and explain the factors contributing to PCPs ordering unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Veterans Affairs PCPs identified from administrative data as having high or low rates of guideline-concordant LS-MRI ordering in 2016.

APPROACH

Providers were interviewed about their use of LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain and factors contributing to their decision-making. Directed content analysis of transcripts was conducted to identify and compare environmental-, patient-, and provider-level factors contributing to unneeded LS-MRI.

KEY RESULTS

Fifty-five PCPs participated (8.6% response rate). Both low (n = 33) and high (n = 22) guideline-concordant providers reported that LS-MRIs were required for specialty care referrals, but they differed in how other environmental factors (stringency of radiology utilization review, management of patient travel burden, and time constraints) contributed to LS-MRI ordering patterns. Low- and high-guideline-concordant providers reported similar patient factors (beliefs in value of imaging and pressure on providers). However, provider groups differed in how provider-level factors (guideline familiarity and agreement, the extent to which they acquiesced to patients, and belief in the value of LS-MRI) contributed to LS-MRI ordering patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Results describe how diverse environmental, patient, and provider factors contribute to unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain. Prior research using a single intervention to reduce unneeded LS-MRI has been ineffective. Results suggest that multifaceted de-implementation strategies may be required to reduce unneeded LS-MRI.