Tackling Guideline Non-concordance: Primary Care Barriers to Incorporating Life Expectancy into Lung Cancer Screening Decision-Making-A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) are often the first point of contact for discussing lung cancer screening (LCS) with patients. While guidelines recommend against screening people with limited life expectancy (LLE) who are less likely to benefit, these patients are regularly referred for LCS.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand barriers PCPs face to incorporating life expectancy into LCS decision-making for patients who otherwise meet eligibility criteria, and how a hypothetical point-of-care tool could support patient selection.

DESIGN

Qualitative study based on semi-structured telephone interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-one PCPs who refer patients for LCS, from six Veterans Health Administration facilities.

APPROACH

We thematically analyzed interviews to understand how PCPs incorporated life expectancy into LCS decision-making and PCPs' receptivity to a point-of-care tool to support patient selection. Final themes were organized according to the Cabana et al. framework Why Don't Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines, capturing the influence of clinician knowledge, attitudes, and behavior on LCS appropriateness determinations.

KEY RESULTS

PCP referrals to LCS for patients with LLE were influenced by limited knowledge of the life expectancy threshold at which patients are less likely to benefit from LCS, discomfort estimating life expectancy, fear of missing cancer at the point of early detection, and prioritization of factors such as quality of life, patient values, clinician-patient relationship, and family support. PCPs were receptive to a decision support tool to inform and communicate LCS appropriateness decisions if easy to use and integrated into clinical workflows.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests knowledge gaps and attitudes may drive decisions to offer screening despite LLE, a behavior counter to guideline recommendations. Integrating a LCS decision support tool that incorporates life expectancy within the electronic medical record and existing clinical workflows may be one acceptable solution to improve guideline concordance and increase confidence in selecting high benefit patients for LCS.

Behavioral Strategies in Diagnostic Stewardship

Diagnostic stewardship refers to the responsible and judicious use of diagnostic tests to reduce low value care and improve patient outcomes. This article provides an overview of behavioral strategies, their relevance to diagnostic stewardship and highlights behavioral determinants that drive diagnostic testing behavior, drawing on theoretic frameworks. Additionally, we provide concrete examples of evidence-based behavioral strategies for promoting appropriate diagnostic testing while acknowledging associated challenges. Finally, we highlight the significance of evaluating these strategies and provide an overview of evaluation frameworks and methods.

Effectiveness of de-implementation strategies for low-value prescribing in secondary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Considerable efforts have been made to improve guideline adherence in healthcare through de-implementation, such as decreasing the prescription of inappropriate medicines. However, we have limited knowledge about the effectiveness, barriers, facilitators and consequences of de-implementation strategies targeting inappropriate medication prescribing in secondary care settings. This review was conducted to understand these factors to contribute to better replication and optimisation of future de-implementation efforts to reduce low-value care.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomised control trials was conducted. Papers were identified through CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane register of controlled trials to February 2021. Eligible studies were randomised control trials evaluating behavioural strategies to de-implement inappropriate prescribing in secondary healthcare. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Intervention characteristics, effectiveness, barriers, facilitators and consequences were identified in the study text and tabulated.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included, of which seven were reported as effectively de-implementing low-value prescribing. Included studies were judged to be mainly at low to moderate risk for selection biases and generally high risk for performance and reporting biases. The majority of these strategies were clinical decision support at the 'point of care'. Clinical decision support tools were the most common and effective. They were found to be a low-cost and simple strategy. However, barriers such as clinician's reluctance to accept recommendations, or the clinical setting were potential barriers to their success. Educational strategies were the second most reported intervention type however the utility of educational strategies for de-implementation remains varied. Multiple barriers and facilitators relating to the environmental context, resources and knowledge were identified across studies as potentially influencing de-implementation. Various consequences were identified; however, few measured the impact of de-implementation on usual appropriate practice.

CONCLUSION

This review offers insight into the intervention strategies, potential barriers, facilitators and consequences that may affect the de-implementation of low-value prescribing in secondary care. Identification of these key features helps understand how and why these strategies are effective and the wider (desirable or undesirable) impact of de-implementation. These findings can contribute to the successful replication or optimisation of strategies used to de-implement low-value prescribing practices in future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021243944).

Beyond implementation: Uncovering the parallels between de-implementation and antimicrobial stewardship

De-implementation is defined as the process of discontinuing, removing, reducing, or replacing a harmful, ineffective, or low-value clinical practice or intervention. The goal of de-implementation strategies is to minimize patient harm, maximize use of resources, and reduce healthcare costs and inequities. Both antibiotic and diagnostic stewardship programs focus on reducing low-value interventions (tests or antimicrobials). Stewardship interventions commonly involve de-implementation and deprescribing strategies. This commentary explores unique aspects of deimplementing low-value testing and unnecessary antimicrobial use, similarities between de-implementation and stewardship approaches, multilevel factors that impact de-implementation, and opportunities for future research.

Development of the SPREAD framework to support the scaling of de-implementation strategies: a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to increase the understanding of the scaling of de-implementation strategies by identifying the determinants of the process and developing a determinant framework.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This study has a mixed-methods design. First, we performed an integrative review to build a literature-based framework describing the determinants of the scaling of healthcare innovations and interventions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies from 1995 to December 2020. We systematically extracted the determinants of the scaling of interventions and developed a literature-based framework. Subsequently, this framework was discussed in four focus groups with national and international de-implementation experts. The literature-based framework was complemented by the findings of the focus group meetings and adapted for the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

RESULTS

The literature search resulted in 42 articles that discussed the determinants of the scaling of innovations and interventions. No articles described determinants specifically for de-implementation strategies. During the focus groups, all participants agreed on the relevance of the extracted determinants for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. The experts emphasised that while the determinants are relevant for various countries, the implications differ due to different contexts, cultures and histories. The analyses of the focus groups resulted in additional topics and determinants, namely, medical training, professional networks, interests of stakeholders, clinical guidelines and patients' perspectives. The results of the focus group meetings were combined with the literature framework, which together formed the supporting the scaling of de-implementation strategies (SPREAD) framework. The SPREAD framework includes determinants from four domains: (1) scaling plan, (2) external context, (3) de-implementation strategy and (4) adopters.

CONCLUSIONS

The SPREAD framework describes the determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies. These determinants are potential targets for various parties to facilitate the scaling of de-implementation strategies. Future research should validate these determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

Physiotherapists' attitudes, views, and beliefs about Choosing Wisely recommendations: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Explore physiotherapists' attitudes, views, and beliefs towards the Australian Physiotherapy Association's (APA) Choosing Wisely recommendations.

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with physiotherapists who were registered to practise in Australia. We purposively recruited participants with different demographics, clinical backgrounds, and years of experience to achieve diversity in views and opinions. Interviews explored barriers and facilitators to adopting the APA's Choosing Wisely recommendations, and strategies to increase adoption. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

We interviewed 19 participants (79.2% of 26 who expressed interest to be interviewed). Mean (SD) age of participants was 33.4 (11.6), mean (SD) years of experience was 10 (11.4), 90% were male (n = 17) and 53% worked in private practice (n = 10). Most participants were slightly (42.1%, n = 8) or at least moderately familiar (42.1%, n = 8) with the recommendations. Barriers to adopting the recommendations included 1) clinicians' beliefs, experience, and knowledge, 2) patients' clinical presentation, their beliefs, and expectations, 3) workplace demands and culture, and 4) vague and restrictive language, and lack of awareness. Facilitators to adopting the recommendations included 1) physiotherapists' beliefs and practise patterns, 2) organisational support, and 3) clear and appropriate recommendations. Suggested strategies to increase adoption of the recommendations were 1) interventions targeting clinicians, 2) amendments to the recommendations and 3) increased awareness and access to the recommendations.

CONCLUSION

These findings will inform the development and dissemination of future Choosing Wisely recommendations, and development of strategies to replace low-value physiotherapy with high-value physiotherapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Understanding low-value care and associated de-implementation processes: a qualitative study of Choosing Wisely Interventions across Canadian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Choosing Wisely (CW) is an international movement comprised of campaigns in more than 20 countries to reduce low-value care (LVC). De-implementation, the reduction or removal of a healthcare practice that offers little to no benefit or causes harm, is an emerging field of research. Little is known about the factors which (i) sustain LVC; and (ii) the magnitude of the problem of LVC. In addition, little is known about the processes of de-implementation, and if and how these processes differ from implementation endeavours. The objective of this study was to explicate the myriad factors which impact the processes and outcomes of de-implementation initiatives that are designed to address national Choosing Wisely campaign recommendations.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals implementing Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations in healthcare settings in four provinces. The interview guide was developed using concepts from the literature and the Implementation Process Model (IPM) as a framework. All interviews were conducted virtually, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Seventeen Choosing Wisely team members were interviewed. Participants identified numerous provider factors, most notably habit, which sustain LVC. Contrary to reporting in recent studies, the majority of LVC in the sample was not 'patient facing'; therefore, patients were not a significant driver for the LVC, nor a barrier to reducing it. Participants detailed aspects of the magnitude of the problems of LVC, providing insight into the complexities and nuances of harm, resources and prevalence. Harm from potential or common infections, reactions, or overtreatment was viewed as the most significant types of harm. Unique factors influencing the processes of de-implementation reported were: influence of Choosing Wisely campaigns, availability of data, lack of targets and hard-coded interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study explicates factors ranging from those which impact the maintenance of LVC to factors that impact the success of de-implementation interventions intended to reduce them. The findings draw attention to the significance of unintentional factors, highlight the importance of understanding the impact of harm and resources to reduce LVC and illuminate the overstated impact of patients in de-implementation literature. These findings illustrate the complexities of de-implementation.

Using theories and frameworks to understand how to reduce low-value healthcare: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

There is recognition that the overuse of procedures, testing, and medications constitutes low-value care which strains the healthcare system and, in some circumstances, can cause unnecessary stress and harm for patients. Initiatives across dozens of countries have raised awareness about the harms of low-value care but have had mixed success and the levels of reductions realized have been modest. Similar to the complex drivers of implementation processes, there is a limited understanding of the individual and social behavioral aspects of de-implementation. While researchers have begun to use theory to elucidate the dynamics of de-implementation, the research remains largely atheoretical. The use of theory supports the understanding of how and why interventions succeed or fail and what key factors predict success. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and characterize the use of theoretical approaches used to understand and/or explain what influences efforts to reduce low-value care.

METHODS

We conducted a review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus databases from inception to June 2021. Building on previous research, 43 key terms were used to search the literature. The database searches identified 1998 unique articles for which titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion; 232 items were selected for full-text review.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Over half of the included articles were published in the last 2 years. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was the most commonly used determinant framework (n = 22). Of studies that used classic theories, the majority used the Theory of Planned Behavior (n = 6). For implementation theories, Normalization Process Theory and COM-B were used (n = 7). Theories or frameworks were used primarily to identify determinants (n = 37) and inform data analysis (n = 31). Eleven types of low-value care were examined in the included studies, with prescribing practices (e.g., overuse, polypharmacy, and appropriate prescribing) targeted most frequently.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review provides a rigorous, comprehensive, and extensive synthesis of theoretical approaches used to understand and/or explain what factors influence efforts to reduce low-value care. The results of this review can provide direction and insight for future primary research to support de-implementation and the reduction of low-value care.

Overuse of antenatal visits and ultrasounds in low-risk women: A national population-based study

BACKGROUND

A better understanding of the overuse of antenatal care is needed to improve its organisation to deal with limited medical resources and doctor shortages.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the proportion of women who overuse antenatal care and the associations of overuse with maternal characteristics and the qualifications of healthcare providers.

METHODS

We used the 2016 National Perinatal Survey, a cross-sectional population-based survey, performed in all maternity units in France, including 13,132 women. Based on the French national guidelines, 6-8 antenatal visits were defined as adequate, 9-11 as high use, and ≥12 as overuse, while 3 ultrasounds were considered adequate, 4-5 as high use, and ≥6 as overuse. We performed binary modified Poisson regressions-with adequate care as the reference-including maternal social and medical characteristics and the healthcare professionals' qualifications.

RESULTS

After women with inadequate care were excluded, 19.2% of low-risk women had at least 12 visits and 30.5% at least 6 ultrasounds. Overuse of visits was associated with primiparity, average to high income, less than good psychological well-being, and care by an obstetrician. The risks of overuse of ultrasounds were higher among primiparous, women with average to high income and those receiving care from a public-sector obstetrician (adjusted relative risk 1.17, 95% CI, 1.13, 1.21) or private obstetrician (adjusted relative risk 1.12, 95% CI, 1.07, 1.16), compared with a public-sector midwife.

CONCLUSIONS

Antenatal care overuse is very common in France and associated with some maternal characteristics and also the qualification of care provider. Antenatal care should be customised according to women's needs, in particular for primiparae and those with poor well-being, and available medical resources.

Docs with their eyes on the clock? The effect of time pressures on primary care productivity

This paper examines how time pressure, an important constraint faced by medical care providers, affects productivity in primary care. We generate empirical predictions by incorporating time pressure into a model of physician behavior by Tai-Seale and McGuire (2012). We use data from the electronic health records of a large integrated delivery system and leverage unexpected schedule changes as variation in time pressure. We find that greater time pressure reduces the number of diagnoses recorded during a visit and increases both scheduled and unscheduled follow-up care. We also find some evidence of increased low-value care, decreased preventive care, and decreased opioid prescribing.

Efficiency over thoroughness in laboratory testing decision making in primary care: findings from a realist review

Background

Existing research demonstrates significant variation in test-ordering practice, and growth in the use of laboratory tests in primary care. Reviews of interventions designed to change test-ordering practice report heterogeneity in design and effectiveness. Improving understanding of clinicians’ decision making in relation to laboratory testing is an important means of understanding practice patterns and developing theory-informed interventions.

Aim

To develop explanations for the underlying causes of patterns of variation and increasing use of laboratory tests in primary care, and make recommendations for future research and intervention design.

Design & setting

Realist review of secondary data from primary care.

Method

Diverse evidence, including data from qualitative and quantitative studies, was gathered via systematic and iterative searching processes. Data were synthesised according to realist principles to develop explanations accounting for clinicians’ decision making in relation to laboratory tests.

Results

A total of 145 documents contributed data to the synthesis. Laboratory test ordering can fulfil many roles in primary care. Decisions about tests are incorporated into practice heuristics and tests are deployed as a tool to manage patient interactions. Ordering tests may be easier than not ordering tests in existing systems. Alongside high workloads and limited time to devote to decision making, there is a common perception that laboratory tests are relatively inconsequential interventions. Clinicians prioritise efficiency over thoroughness in decision making about laboratory tests.

Conclusion

Interventions to change test-ordering practice can be understood as aiming to preserve efficiency or encourage thoroughness in decision making. Intervention designs and evaluations should consider how testing decisions are made in real-world clinical practice.

Determinants for the use and de-implementation of low-value care in health care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

A considerable proportion of interventions provided to patients lack evidence of their effectiveness. This implies that patients may receive ineffective, unnecessary or even harmful care. However, despite some empirical studies in the field, there has been no synthesis of determinants impacting the use of low-value care (LVC) and the process of de-implementing LVC.

AIM

The aim was to identify determinants influencing the use of LVC, as well as determinants for de-implementation of LVC practices in health care.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed based on the framework by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched four scientific databases, conducted snowball searches of relevant articles and hand searched the journal Implementation Science for peer-reviewed journal articles in English. Articles were included if they were empirical studies reporting on determinants for the use of LVC or de-implementation of LVC. The abstract review and the full-text review were conducted in duplicate and conflicting decisions were discussed until consensus was reached. Data were charted using a piloted data charting form and the determinants were inductively coded and categorised in an iterative process conducted by the project group.

RESULTS

In total, 101 citations were included in the review. Of these, 92 reported on determinants for the use of LVC and nine on determinants for de-implementation. The studies were conducted in a range of health care settings and investigated a variety of LVC practices with LVC medication prescriptions, imaging and screening procedures being the most common. The identified determinants for the use of LVC as well as for de-implementation of LVC practices broadly concerned: patients, professionals, outer context, inner context, process and evidence and LVC practice. The results were discussed in relation to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

CONCLUSION

The identified determinants largely overlap with existing implementation frameworks, although patient expectations and professionals' fear of malpractice appear to be more prominent determinants for the use and de-implementation of LVC. Thus, existing implementation determinant frameworks may require adaptation to be transferable to de-implementation. Strategies to reduce the use of LVC should specifically consider determinants for the use and de-implementation of LVC.

REGISTRATION

The review has not been registered.

Education vs Clinician Feedback on Antibiotic Prescriptions for Acute Respiratory Infections in Telemedicine: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory tract infections in the telemedicine setting are often unwarranted.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that education plus individualized feedback, compared with education alone, would significantly reduce antibiotic prescription rates for upper respiratory infections, bronchitis, sinusitis, and pharyngitis in a telemedicine setting.

DESIGN

Two-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial conducted at a telemedicine practice from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinicians employed at the practice on or after January 1, 2017 (n = 45).

INTERVENTIONS

The control group received education (treatment guideline presentation and online course) in April 2018. The intervention group received education plus individualized feedback via an online dashboard with monthly rates of personal and practice-wide antibiotic prescription rates starting May 2018.

MAIN MEASURES

Antibiotic prescription for any visit with at least one target condition: upper respiratory tract infection, bronchitis, sinusitis, and pharyngitis.

KEY RESULTS

Baseline antibiotic prescription rates in control and intervention groups across conditions were as follows: upper respiratory infection (URI): 626/3410 (18.4%), 413/2752 (15.0%), bronchitis: 689/1471 (46.8%), 742/1162 (64.0%), sinusitis: 5154/6131 (84.1%), 4250/4876 (87.2%), pharyngitis: 2308/2838 (81.3%), 1593/2126 (74.9%). Antibiotic prescriptions for all conditions decreased in the post-intervention period compared with those in the pre-intervention period, for both control and intervention groups. Reduction of antibiotic prescriptions for URI and bronchitis was greater for the group receiving education plus individualized feedback compared with that for the group receiving education alone (interaction term ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.77 for URI; and interaction term ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.55 for bronchitis), but not sinusitis and pharyngitis.

CONCLUSION

Education plus individualized feedback in a telemedicine practice significantly decreased antibiotic prescription rates for upper respiratory tract infections and bronchitis, compared with education alone. Future studies should focus on tailoring antibiotic stewardship programs based on underlying conditions, and the maintenance of early reductions in antibiotic prescription.

Study protocol for evaluation of aid to diagnosis for developmental dysplasia of the hip in general practice: controlled trial randomised by practice

INTRODUCTION

In the UK, a compulsory '6-week hip check' is performed in primary care for the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). However, missed diagnoses and infants incorrectly labelled with DDH remain a problem, potentially leading to adverse consequences for infants, their families and the National Health Service. National policy states that infants should be referred to hospital if the 6-week check suggests DDH, though there is no available tool to aid examination or offer guidelines for referral. We developed standardised diagnostic criteria for DDH, based on international Delphi consensus, and a 9-item checklist that has the potential to enable non-experts to diagnose DDH in a manner approaching that of experts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a controlled trial randomised by practice that will compare a diagnostic aid against standard care for the hip check. The primary objective is to determine whether an aid to the diagnosis of DDH reduces the number of clinically insignificant referrals from primary care to hospital and the number of late diagnosed DDH. The trial will include a qualitative process evaluation, an assessment of professional behavioural change and a full health economic evaluation. We will recruit 152 general practitioner practices in England. These will be randomised to conduct the hip checks with use of the study diagnostic aid and/or as per usual practice. The total number of infants seen during a 15-month recruitment period will be 110 per practice. Two years after the 6-week hip check, we will measure the number of referred infants that are (1) clinically insignificant for DDH and (2) those that constitute appropriate referrals.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has approval from the Health Research Authority (16/1/2020) and the Confidentiality Advisory Group (18/2/2020). Results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals, disseminated to patient organisations and the media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04101903; Pre-results.

Developing Strategies to Reduce Unnecessary Services in Primary Care: Protocol for User-Centered Design Charrettes

Background

Overtreatment and overtesting expose patients to unnecessary, wasteful, and potentially harmful care. Reducing overtreatment or overtesting that has become ingrained in current clinical practices and is being delivered on a routine basis will require solutions that incorporate a deep understanding of multiple perspectives, particularly those on the front lines of clinical care: patients and their clinicians. Design approaches are a promising and innovative way to incorporate stakeholder needs, desires, and challenges to develop solutions to complex problems.

Objective

This study aimed (1) to engage patients in a design process to develop high-level deintensification strategies for primary care (ie, strategies for scaling back or stopping routine medical services that more recent evidence reveals are not beneficial) and (2) to engage both patients and primary care providers in further co-design to develop and refine the broad deintensification strategies identified in phase 1.

Methods

We engaged stakeholders in design charrettes—intensive workshops in which key stakeholders are brought together to develop creative solutions to a specific problem—focused on deintensification of routine overuse in primary care. We conducted the study in 2 phases: a 6.5-hour design charrette with 2 different groups of patients (phase 1) and a subsequent 4-hour charrette with clinicians and a subgroup of phase 1 patients (phase 2). Both phases included surveys and educational presentations related to deintensification. Phase 1 involved several design activities (mind mapping, business origami, and empathy mapping) to help patients gain a deeper understanding of the individuals involved in deintensification. Following that, we asked participants to review hypothetical scenarios where patients, clinicians, or the broader health system context posed a barrier to deintensification and then to brainstorm solutions. The deintensification themes identified in phase 1 were used to guide phase 2. This second phase primarily involved 1 design activity (WhoDo). In this activity, patients and clinicians worked together to develop concrete actions that specific stakeholders could take to support deintensification efforts. This activity included identifying barriers to the actions and approaches to overcoming those barriers.

Results

A total of 35 patients participated in phase 1, and 9 patients and 7 clinicians participated in phase 2. The analysis of the deintensification strategies and survey data is currently underway. The results are expected to be submitted for publication in early 2020.

Conclusions

Health care interventions are frequently developed without input from the people who are most affected. The exclusion of these stakeholders in the design process often influences and limits the impact of the intervention. This study employed design charrettes, guided by a flexible user-centered design model, to bring clinicians and patients with differing backgrounds and with different expectations together to cocreate real-world solutions to the complex issue of deintensifying medical services.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/15618

The appropriateness of oral surgery referrals and treatment in contracted intermediate minor oral surgery practices in East Kent

Objectives To assess the appropriateness of oral surgery referrals, after triage, to intermediate minor oral surgery (IMOS) practices in East Kent and whether or not referrals vary according to the referring general dental practitioner's (GDP's) place of qualification and experience.Design A retrospective study of the records of 441 triaged referrals sent to three IMOS practices in East Kent, over a ten-week period. An assessment tool was developed in line with local and national referral guidelines. Information on all referrals was obtained from the IMOS provider and referral records. Descriptive analysis of the data was performed.Results The most common reason for referral was for extraction of teeth requiring bone removal (n = 155; 35%). However, the majority of teeth removed were recorded as a non-surgical extraction (n = 363; 82%). Medical histories were included appropriately in the referral communications, with only 0.2% of all referrals being inappropriate. The proportion of appropriate and inappropriate referrals was very similar and it was found that referral rate was lower from dentists who had been qualified for more than ten years. GDPs working in the same location as the IMOS provider made a greater total number of referrals as well as more inappropriate referrals.Conclusions In the group of GDPs and IMOS providers studied, a wide variation was observed between the GDP's reason for referral and the treatment provided. It may be concluded that the vast majority of extractions were safely completed in an IMOS dental practice in a primary care setting.

Limit, lean or listen? A typology of low-value care that gives direction in de-implementation

Background

Overuse of unnecessary care is widespread around the world. This so-called low-value care provides no benefit for the patient, wastes resources and can cause harm. The concept of low-value care is broad and there are different reasons for care to be of low-value. Hence, different strategies might be necessary to reduce it and awareness of this may help in designing a de-implementation strategy. Based on a literature scan and discussions with experts, we identified three types of low-value care.

Results

The type ineffective care is proven ineffective, such as antibiotics for a viral infection. Inefficient care is in essence effective, but is of low-value through inefficient provision or inappropriate intensity, such as chronic benzodiazepine use. Unwanted care is in essence appropriate for the clinical condition it targets, but is low-value since it does not fit the patients’ preferences, such as a treatment aimed to cure a patient that prefers palliative care. In this paper, we argue that these three types differ in their most promising strategy for de-implementation and that our typology gives direction in choosing whether to limit, lean or listen.

Conclusion

We developed a typology that provides insight in the different reasons for care to be of low-value. We believe that this typology is helpful in designing a tailor-made strategy for reducing low-value care.

Factors Influencing Overuse of Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Excessive breast cancer screening with mammography or other modalities often burdens patients with false-positive results and costs. Yet, screening patients beyond the age at which they will benefit or at too frequent intervals persists. This review summarizes the factors associated with overuse of breast cancer screening.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase from January 1998 to March 2017 for articles addressing the overuse of breast cancer screening and hand-searched the reference lists of included articles. Studies were included if they were written in English, pertained to a U.S. population, and identified a factor associated specifically with overuse of breast imaging. Paired reviewers independently screened abstracts, extracted data, and assessed quality.

RESULTS

We included 15 studies: 3 cohort, 5 cross-sectional, 6 surveys, and 1 in-depth interview. White women (non-Hispanic) were less vulnerable than other racial groups to overuse in 3 of 5 studies. Physician specialty was consistently associated with screening overuse in three of three studies. Abundant access to primary care and a patient desire for screening were associated with breast cancer screening overuse. Lower self-confidence, lower risk taking tendencies, higher perception of conflict in expert recommendations, and a belief in screening effectiveness were clinician traits associated with overuse of screening in the surveys.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature supports that liberal access to care and clinicians' recommendations to screen, possibly influenced by conflicting guidelines, increase excessive breast cancer screening. Overuse might conceivably be reduced with more concordance across guidelines, physician education, patient involvement in decision-making, thoughtful insurance restrictions, and limitations on the supply of services; however, these will need careful testing regarding their impact.

Medical overuse in the Iranian healthcare system: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Lack of resources is one of the main problems of all healthcare systems. Recent studies have shown that reducing the overuse of medical services plays an important role in reducing healthcare system costs. Overuse of medical services is a major problem in the healthcare system, and it threatens the quality of the services, can harm patients and create excess costs for patients. So far, few studies have been conducted in this regard in Iran. The main objective of this systematic review is to perform an inclusive search for studies that report overuse of medical services in the Iranian healthcare system.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

An extensive search of the literature will be conducted in six databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane and Scientific Information Database using a comprehensive search strategy to identify studies on overuse of medical care. The search will be done without time limit until the end of 2017, completed by reference tracking, author tracking and expert consultation. The search will be conducted on 1 February 2018. Any study that reports an overuse in a service based on a specific standard will be included in the study. Two reviewers will screen the articles based on the title, abstract and full text, and extract data about type of service, clinical area and overuse rate. Quality appraisal will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Potential discrepancies will be resolved by consulting a third author.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Recommendations will be made to the Iranian MOHME (Ministry of Health and Medical Education) in order to make better evidence-based decisions about medical services in the future.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017075481.

A Practical Framework for Understanding and Reducing Medical Overuse: Conceptualizing Overuse Through the Patient-Clinician Interaction

Overuse of medical services is an increasingly recognized driver of poor-quality care and high cost. A practical framework is needed to guide clinical decisions and facilitate concrete actions that can reduce overuse and improve care. We used an iterative, expert-informed, evidence-based process to develop a framework for conceptualizing interventions to reduce medical overuse. Given the complexity of defining and identifying overused care in nuanced clinical situations and the need to define care appropriateness in the context of an individual patient, this framework conceptualizes the patient-clinician interaction as the nexus of decisions regarding inappropriate care. This interaction is influenced by other utilization drivers, including healthcare system factors, the practice environment, the culture of professional medicine, the culture of healthcare consumption, and individual patient and clinician factors. The variable strength of the evidence supporting these domains highlights important areas for further investigation. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:346-351.

Perceived Barriers to Implementing Individual Choosing Wisely® Recommendations in Two National Surveys of Primary Care Providers

BACKGROUND

While some research has examined general attitudes about efforts to reduce overutilization of services, such as the Choosing Wisely^® (CW) initiative, little data exists regarding primary care providers' attitudes regarding individual recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify whether particular CW recommendations were perceived by primary care providers as difficult to follow, difficult for patients to accept, or both.

DESIGN

Two national surveys, one by mail to a random sample of 2000 U.S. primary care physicians in November 2013, and the second electronically to a random sample of 2500 VA primary care providers (PCPs) in October-December 2014.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 603 U.S. primary care physicians and 1173 VA primary care providers. Response rates were 34 and 48 %, respectively.

MAIN MEASURES

PCP ratings of whether 12 CW recommendations for screening, testing and treatments applicable to adult primary care were difficult to follow and difficult for patients to accept; and ratings of potential barriers to reducing overutilization.

KEY RESULTS

For four recommendations regarding not screening or testing in asymptomatic patients, less than 20 % of PCPs found the CW recommendations difficult to accept (range 7.2-16.6 %) or difficult for patients to follow (12.2-19.3 %). For five recommendations regarding testing or treatment for symptomatic conditions, however, there was both variation in reported difficulty to follow (9.8-32 %) and a high level of reported difficulty for patients to accept (35.7-87.1 %). The most frequently reported barriers to reducing overuse included malpractice concern, patient requests for services, lack of time for shared decision making, and the number of tests recommended by specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

While PCPs found many CW recommendations easy to follow, they felt that some, especially those for symptomatic conditions, would be difficult for patients to accept. Overcoming PCPs' perceptions of patient acceptability will require approaches beyond routine physician education, feedback and financial incentives.

Barriers to evidence-based physician decision-making at the point of care: a narrative literature review

We conduct a narrative literature review using four real-world cases of clinical decisions to show how barriers to the use of evidence-based medicine affect physician decision-making at the point of care, and where adjustments could be made in the healthcare system to address these barriers. Our four cases constitute decisions typical of the types physicians make on a regular basis: diagnostic testing, initial treatment and treatment monitoring. To shed light on opportunities to improve patient care while reducing costs, we focus on barriers that could be addressed through changes to policy and/or practice at a particular level of the healthcare system. We conclude by relating our findings to the passage of the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act in April 2015.

PQRS Participation, Inappropriate Utilization of Health Care Services, and Medicare Expenditures

Medicare's Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) is the largest quality-reporting system in the U.S. health care system and a basis for the new value-based modifier system for physician payment. The PQRS allows health care providers to report measures of quality of care that include both the process of care and physiological outcomes. Using a multivariate difference-in-differences model, we examine the relationship of PQRS participation to three claims-computable measures of inappropriate utilization of health care services and risk-adjusted per capita Medicare expenditures. The data are a national random sample of PQRS-participating providers matched to nonparticipating providers by zip code and caseload. We found few significant relationships in the overall analysis. However, the magnitude and statistical significance of the desirable associations increased in subgroups of providers and beneficiaries more prone to overutilization (e.g., males, older beneficiaries, beneficiaries treated in larger medical practices or by nonphysicians, and practices in rural areas), and among beneficiaries with heart conditions, diabetes, and eye problems.