Exploring unwarranted clinical variation: The attitudes of midwives and obstetric medical staff regarding induction of labour and planned caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Unexplained clinical variation is a major issue in planned birth i.e. induction of labour and planned caesarean section.

AIM

To map attitudes and knowledge of maternity care professionals regarding indications for planned birth, and assess inter-professional (midwifery versus medical) and intra-professional variation.

METHODS

A custom-created survey of medical and midwifery staff at eight Sydney hospitals. Staff were asked to rate their level of agreement with 45 "evidence-based" statements regarding caesareans and inductions on a five-point Likert scale. Responses were grouped by profession, and comparisons made of inter- and intra-professional responses.

FINDINGS

Total 275 respondents, 78% midwifery and 21% medical. Considerable inter- and intra-professional variation was noted, with midwives generally less likely to consider any of the planned birth indications "valid" compared to medical staff. Indications for induction with most variation in midwifery responses included maternal characteristics (age≥40, obesity, ethnicity) and fetal macrosomia; and for medical personnel in-vitro fertilisation, maternal request, and routine induction at 39 weeks gestation. Indications for caesarean with most variation in midwifery responses included previous lower segment caesarean section, previous shoulder dystocia, and uncomplicated breech; and for medical personnel uncomplicated dichorionic twins. Indications with most inter-professional variation were induction at 41+ weeks versus 42+ weeks and cesarean for previous lower segment caesarean section.

DISCUSSION

Both inter- and intra-professional variation in what were considered valid indications reflected inconsistency in underlying evidence and/or guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Greater focus on interdisciplinary education and consensus, as well as on shared decision-making with women, may be helpful in resolving these tensions.

Can feedback approaches reduce unwarranted clinical variation? A systematic rapid evidence synthesis

Background

Assessment of clinical variation has attracted increasing interest in health systems internationally due to growing awareness about better value and appropriate health care as a mechanism for enhancing efficient, effective and timely care. Feedback using administrative databases to provide benchmarking data has been utilised in several countries to explore clinical care variation and to enhance guideline adherent care. Whilst methods for detecting variation are well-established, methods for determining variation that is unwarranted and addressing this are strongly debated. This study aimed to synthesize published evidence of the use of feedback approaches to address unwarranted clinical variation (UCV).

Methods

A rapid review and narrative evidence synthesis was undertaken as a policy-focused review to understand how feedback approaches have been applied to address UCV specifically. Key words, synonyms and subject headings were used to search the major electronic databases Medline and PubMed between 2000 and 2018. Titles and abstracts of publications were screened by two reviewers and independently checked by a third reviewer. Full text articles were screened against the eligibility criteria. Key findings were extracted and integrated in a narrative synthesis.

Results

Feedback approaches that occurred over a duration of 1 month to 9 years to address clinical variation emerged from 27 publications with quantitative (20), theoretical/conceptual/descriptive work (4) and mixed or multi-method studies (3). Approaches ranged from presenting evidence to individuals, teams and organisations, to providing facilitated tailored feedback supported by a process of ongoing dialogue to enable change. Feedback approaches identified primarily focused on changing clinician decision-making and behaviour. Providing feedback to clinicians was identified, in a range of a settings, as associated with changes in variation such as reducing overuse of tests and treatments, reducing variations in optimal patient clinical outcomes and increasing guideline or protocol adherence.

Conclusions

The review findings suggest value in the use of feedback approaches to respond to clinical variation and understand when action is warranted. Evaluation of the effectiveness of particular feedback approaches is now required to determine if there is an optimal approach to create change where needed.

Induction of labour indications and timing: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines

BACKGROUND

There is widespread and some unexplained variation in induction of labour rates between hospitals. Some practice variation may stem from variability in clinical guidelines. This review aimed to identify to what extent induction of labour guidelines provide consistent recommendations in relation to reasons for, and timing of, induction of labour and ascertain whether inconsistencies can be explained by variability guideline quality.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018. General induction of labour guidelines and condition-specific guidelines containing induction of labour recommendations were searched. Guidelines were reviewed and extracted independently by two reviewers. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument.

FINDINGS

Forty nine guidelines of varying quality were included. Indications where guidelines had mostly consistent advice included prolonged pregnancy (induction between 41 and 42 weeks), preterm premature rupture of membranes, and term preeclampsia (induction when preeclampsia diagnosed ≥37 weeks). Guidelines were also consistent in agreeing on decreased fetal movements and oligohydramnios as valid indications for induction, although timing recommendations were absent or inconsistent. Common indications where there was little consensus on validity and/or timing of induction included gestational diabetes, fetal macrosomia, elevated maternal body mass index, and twin pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Substantial variation in clinical practice guidelines for indications for induction exists. As guidelines rated of similar quality presented conflicting recommendations, guideline variability was not explained by guideline quality. Guideline variability may partly account for unexplained variation in induction of labour rates.

Indications for, and timing of, planned caesarean section: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines

BACKGROUND

There has been a worldwide rise in planned caesarean sections over recent decades, with significant variations in practice between hospitals and countries. Guidelines are known to influence clinical decision-making and, potentially, unwarranted clinical variation. The aim of this study was to review guidelines for recommendations in relation to the timing and indications for planned caesarean section as well as recommendations around the process of decision-making.

METHOD

A systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018 was undertaken. Guidelines were reviewed, assessed in terms of quality and extracted independently by two reviewers.

FINDINGS

In total, 49 guidelines of varying quality were included. There was consistency between the guidelines in potential indications for caesarean section, although guidelines vary in terms of the level of detail. There was substantial variation in timing of birth, for example recommended timing of caesarean section for women with uncomplicated placenta praevia is between 36 and 39weeks depending on the guideline. Only 11 guidelines provided detailed guidance on shared decision-making. In general, national-level guidelines from Australia, and overseas, received higher quality ratings than regional guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The majority of guidelines, regardless of their quality, provide very limited information to guide shared decision-making or the timing of planned caesarean section, two of the most vital aspects of guidance. National guidelines were generally of better quality than regional ones, suggesting these should be used as a template where possible and emphasis placed on improving national guidelines and minimising intra-country, regional, variability of guidelines.

Variation in GP decisions on antihypertensive treatment in oldest-old and frail individuals across 29 countries

Background

In oldest-old patients (>80), few trials showed efficacy of treating hypertension and they included mostly the healthiest elderly. The resulting lack of knowledge has led to inconsistent guidelines, mainly based on systolic blood pressure (SBP), cardiovascular disease (CVD) but not on frailty despite the high prevalence in oldest-old. This may lead to variation how General Practitioners (GPs) treat hypertension. Our aim was to investigate treatment variation of GPs in oldest-olds across countries and to identify the role of frailty in that decision.

Methods

Using a survey, we compared treatment decisions in cases of oldest-old varying in SBP, CVD, and frailty. GPs were asked if they would start antihypertensive treatment in each case. In 2016, we invited GPs in Europe, Brazil, Israel, and New Zealand. We compared the percentage of cases that would be treated per countries. A logistic mixed-effects model was used to derive odds ratio (OR) for frailty with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (sex, location and prevalence of oldest-old per GP office, and years of experience). The mixed-effects model was used to account for the multiple assessments per GP.

Results

The 29 countries yielded 2543 participating GPs: 52% were female, 51% located in a city, 71% reported a high prevalence of oldest-old in their offices, 38% and had >20 years of experience. Across countries, considerable variation was found in the decision to start antihypertensive treatment in the oldest-old ranging from 34 to 88%. In 24/29 (83%) countries, frailty was associated with GPs’ decision not to start treatment even after adjustment for SBP, CVD, and GP characteristics (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.48–0.59; ORs per country 0.11–1.78).

Conclusions

Across countries, we found considerable variation in starting antihypertensive medication in oldest-old. The frail oldest-old had an odds ratio of 0.53 of receiving antihypertensive treatment. Future hypertension trials should also include frail patients to acquire evidence on the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment in oldest-old patients with frailty, with the aim to get evidence-based data for clinical decision-making.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0486-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Value analysis of postoperative staging imaging for asymptomatic, early-stage breast cancer: implications of clinical variation on utility and cost

BACKGROUND

Routine staging imaging for early-stage breast cancer is not recommended. Despite this, there is clinical practice variation with imaging studies obtained for asymptomatic patients with a positive sentinel node (SN+). We characterize the utility, cost, and clinical implications of imaging studies obtained in asymptomatic SN+ patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of asymptomatic, clinically node-negative patients who were found to have a positive sentinel node after surgery. The type of imaging, subsequent tests/interventions, frequency of additional malignancy detected, and costs were recorded.

RESULTS

From April 2009 to April 2013, a total of 50 of 113 (44%) asymptomatic patients underwent staging imaging for a positive sentinel node; 11 (22%) patients had at least 1 subsequent imaging study or diagnostic intervention. No instance of metastatic breast cancer was identified, with a total cost of imaging calculated at $116,905.

CONCLUSIONS

Staging imaging for asymptomatic SN+ breast cancer demonstrates clinical variation. These tests were associated with low utility, increased costs, and frequent false positives leading to subsequent testing/intervention. Evidence-based standardization may help increase quality by decreasing unnecessary variation and cost.