To Choose or Not To Choose: Evaluating the Effect of a Choosing Wisely Knowledge Translation Initiative for Imaging in Low Back Pain by Emergency Physicians

Interventions to improve the quality of low back pain care in emergency departments: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Low back pain (LBP) is a common reason people visit Emergency Departments (ED). However, the care provided is often not aligned with guideline recommendations. Despite increasing research aiming to promote guideline-based care in EDs, interventions to best implement recommendations are unknown. This study aimed to identify ED LBP implementation interventions that have been trialed and evaluate their effects on ED-relevant outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis, including studies that evaluated interventions to improve the quality of care provided to adults presenting to ED with LBP. Databases searched until May 2023 were Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE (via OVID), and PEDro. Interventions were categorized according to whether they had a patient, clinician, health service, or multiple-level focus. Where possible, meta-analysis was undertaken. Certainty around the results was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Twenty-eight studies were included. Interventions were categorized as patient (n = 2), clinician (n = 8), health service (n = 12), or multiple-level (n = 6) targeted. Overall, interventions successfully reduced the likelihood of receiving an opioid in ED (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.55-0.75). However, no significant effect on lumbar imaging was demonstrated (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.64-1.12). Subgroup analyses showed that studies reporting high baseline imaging rates ≥ 36% and those that included systems-based changes significantly reduced imaging (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39-0.93; and OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.45-0.94, respectively). A small reduction in ED length of stay was observed in the group exposed to the LBP interventions (mean difference - 0.38 h; 95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.17). Overall, certainty of evidence was deemed low to very low. Interventions were mostly single-system focused with a preference for education-based implementation strategies targeting patients or clinicians. The interventions reduced the use of opioid medication for LBP in ED, but the effects on lumbar imaging rates were uncertain. Further high-quality research is needed to improve LBP care in this setting.

What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Low-value care can harm patients and healthcare systems. Despite a decade of global endeavours, low value care has persisted. Identification of barriers and enablers is essential for effective deimplementation of low-value care. This scoping review is an evidence summary of barriers, enablers and features of effective interventions for deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice worldwide.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, CINAHL, Embase, EMCare, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to 5 December 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Primary studies which employed qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approaches to explore deimplementation of low-value care in an EM setting and reported barriers, enablers or interventions were included. Reviews, protocols, perspectives, comments, opinions, editorials, letters to editors, news articles, books, chapters, policies, guidelines and animal studies were excluded. No language limits were applied.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study selection, data collection and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Barriers, enablers and interventions were mapped to the domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

The search yielded 167 studies. A majority were quantitative studies (90%, 150/167) that evaluated interventions (86%, 143/167). Limited provider abilities, diagnostic uncertainty, lack of provider insight, time constraints, fear of litigation, and patient expectations were the key barriers. Enablers included leadership commitment, provider engagement, provider training, performance feedback to providers and shared decision-making with patients. Interventions included one or more of the following facets: education, stakeholder engagement, audit and feedback, clinical decision support, nudge, clinical champions and training. Multifaceted interventions were more likely to be effective than single-faceted interventions. Effectiveness of multifaceted interventions was influenced by fidelity of the intervention facets. Use of behavioural change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework in the published studies appeared to enhance the effectiveness of interventions to deimplement low-value care.

CONCLUSION

High-fidelity, multifaceted interventions that incorporated education, stakeholder engagement, audit/feedback and clinical decision support, were administered daily and lasted longer than 1 year were most effective in achieving deimplementation of low-value care in emergency departments. This review contributes the best available evidence to date, but further rigorous, theory-informed, qualitative and mixed-methods studies are needed to supplement the growing body of evidence to effectively deimplement low-value care in emergency medicine practice.

Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources is a common problem, constituting 10-34% of health services spending in the western world. Even though diagnostic imaging is vital for identifying correct diagnoses and administrating the right treatment, low-value imaging-in which the diagnostic test confers little to no clinical benefit-is common and contributes to inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources. There is a lack of knowledge on the types and extent of low-value imaging. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to identify, characterize, and quantify the extent of low-value diagnostic imaging examinations for adults and children.

METHODS

A scoping review of the published literature was performed. Medline-Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published from 2010 to September 2020. The search strategy was built from medical subject headings (Mesh) for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology OR Health service misuse/Medical overuse OR Procedures and Techniques Utilization/Facilities and Services Utilization. Articles in English, German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, or Norwegian were included.

RESULTS

A total of 39,986 records were identified and, of these, 370 studies were included in the final synthesis. Eighty-four low-value imaging examinations were identified. Imaging of atraumatic pain, routine imaging in minor head injury, trauma, thrombosis, urolithiasis, after thoracic interventions, fracture follow-up and cancer staging/follow-up were the most frequently identified low-value imaging examinations. The proportion of low-value imaging varied between 2 and 100% inappropriate or unnecessary examinations.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive list of identified low-value radiological examinations for both adults and children are presented. Future research should focus on reasons for low-value imaging utilization and interventions to reduce the use of low-value imaging internationally.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020208072.

The influence of a MOBile-based video Instruction for Low back pain (MOBIL) on initial care decisions made by primary care providers: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adherence to guidelines for back pain continues to be a challenge, prompting strategies focused on improving education around biopsychosocial frameworks.

OBJECTIVE

Assess the influence of an interactive educational mobile app for patients on initial care decisions made for low back pain by the primary care provider. The secondary aim was to compare changes in self-reported pain and function between groups.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled trial involving patients consulting for an initial episode of low back pain. The intervention was a mobile video-based education session (Truth About Low Back Pain) compared to usual care. The app focused on addressing maladaptive beliefs typically associated with higher risk of receiving low-value care options. The primary outcome was initial medical utilization decisions made by primary care practitioners (x-rays, MRIs, opioid prescriptions, injections, procedures) and secondary outcomes included PROMIS pain interference and physical function subscales at 1 and 6 months, and total medical costs.

RESULTS

Of 208 participants (71.2% male; mean age 35.4 years), rates of opioid prescriptions, advanced imaging, analgesic patches, spine injections, and physical therapy use were lower in the education group, but the differences were not significant. Total back-related medical costs for 1 year (mean diff = $132; P = 0.63) and none of the 6-month PROMIS subscales were significantly different between groups. Results were no different in opioid-naïve subjects. Instead, prior opioid use and high-risk of poor prognosis on the STarT Back Screening Tool predicted 1-year back pain-related costs and healthcare utilization, regardless of intervention.

CONCLUSION

Factors that influence medical treatment decisions and guideline-concordant care are complex. This particular patient education approach directed at patients did not appear to influence healthcare decisions made by primary care providers. Future studies should focus on high-risk populations and/or the impact of including the medical provider as an active part of the educational process.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT02777983 .

Interventions to reduce low-value imaging - a systematic review of interventions and outcomes

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that 20-50% of all radiological examinations are of low value. Many attempts have been made to reduce the use of low-value imaging. However, the comparative effectiveness of interventions to reduce low-value imaging is unclear. Thus, the objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview and evaluate the outcomes of interventions aimed at reducing low-value imaging.

METHODS

An electronic database search was completed in Medline - Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for citations between 2010 and 2020. The search was built from medical subject headings for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology, Health service misuse or medical overuse, and Health planning. Keywords were used for the concept of reduction and avoidance. Reference lists of included articles were also hand-searched for relevant citations. Only articles written in English, German, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, and Swedish were included. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to appraise the quality of the included articles. A narrative synthesis of the final included articles was completed.

RESULTS

The search identified 15,659 records. After abstract and full-text screening, 95 studies of varying quality were included in the final analysis, containing 45 studies found through hand-searching techniques. Both controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after studies, time series, chart reviews, and cohort studies were included. Most interventions were aimed at referring physicians. Clinical practice guidelines (n = 28) and education (n = 28) were most commonly evaluated interventions, either alone or in combination with other components. Multi-component interventions were often more effective than single-component interventions showing a reduction in the use of low-value imaging in 94 and 74% of the studies, respectively. The most addressed types of imaging were musculoskeletal (n = 26), neurological (n = 23) and vascular (n = 16) imaging. Seventy-seven studies reported reduced low-value imaging, while 3 studies reported an increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-component interventions that include education were often more effective than single-component interventions. The contextual and cultural factors in the health care systems seem to be vital for successful reduction of low-value imaging. Further research should focus on assessing the impact of the context in interventions reducing low-value imaging and how interventions can be adapted to different contexts.

Barriers and Facilitators to De-Implementation of the Choosing Wisely® Guidelines for Low-Value Breast Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

To address overuse of unnecessary practices, several surgical organizations have participated in the Choosing Wisely^® campaign and identified four breast cancer surgical procedures as unnecessary. Despite evidence demonstrating no survival benefit for all four, evidence suggests only two have been substantially de-implemented. Our objective was to understand why surgeons stop performing certain unnecessary cancer operations but not others and how best to de-implement entrenched and emerging unnecessary procedures.

METHODS

We sampled surgeons who treat breast cancer in a variety of practice types and geographic regions in the United States. Using a semi-structured guide, we conducted telephone interviews (n = 18) to elicit attitudes and understand practices relating to the four identified breast cancer procedures in the Choosing Wisely^® campaign. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and anonymized. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

For the two procedures successfully de-implemented, surgeons described a high level of confidence in the data supporting the recommendations. In contrast, surgeons frequently described a lack of familiarity or skepticism toward the recommendation to avoid sentinel-node biopsy in women ≥ 70 years of age and the influence of other collaborating oncology providers as justification for continued use. Regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, surgeons consistently agreed with the recommendation that this was unnecessary, yet reported continued utilization due to the value placed on patient autonomy and preference.

CONCLUSIONS

With a growing focus on the elimination of ineffective, unproven or low value practices, it is imperative that the behavioral determinants are understood and targeted with specific interventions to decrease utilization rapidly.