Trends in Low-Value Health Service Use and Spending in the US Medicare Fee-for-Service Program, 2014-2018

Use and Cost of Low-Value Services Among Veterans Dually Enrolled in VA and Medicare

BACKGROUND

Over half of veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) are also enrolled in Medicare, potentially increasing their opportunity to receive low-value health services within and outside VA.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the use and cost of low-value services delivered to dually enrolled veterans from VA and Medicare.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional.

PARTICIPANTS

Veterans enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare (FY 2017-2018).

MAIN MEASURES

We used VA and Medicare administrative data to identify 29 low-value services across 6 established domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing, and surgery. We determined the count of low-value services per 100 veterans delivered in VA and Medicare in FY 2018 overall, by domain, and by individual service. We applied standardized estimates to determine each service's cost.

KEY RESULTS

Among 1.6 million dually enrolled veterans, the mean age was 73, 97% were men, and 77% were non-Hispanic White. Overall, 63.2 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered, affecting 32% of veterans; 22.9 services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA and 40.3 services per 100 veterans were delivered in Medicare. The total cost was $226.3 million (M), of which $62.6 M was spent in VA and $163.7 M in Medicare. The most common low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing at 17.3 per 100 veterans (VA 55.9%, Medicare 44.1%). The costliest low-value service was percutaneous coronary intervention (VA $10.1 M, Medicare $32.8 M).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 1 in 3 dually enrolled veterans received a low-value service in FY18, with twice as many low-value services delivered in Medicare vs VA. Interventions to reduce low-value services for veterans should consider their substantial use of such services in Medicare.

Recommendations for Choosing Wisely in Pediatric Emergency Medicine: Five Opportunities to Improve Value

Unnecessary diagnostic tests and treatments in children cared for in emergency departments (EDs) do not benefit patients, increase costs, and may result in harm. To address this low-value care, a taskforce of pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians was formed to create the first PEM Choosing Wisely recommendations. Using a systematic, iterative process, the taskforce collected suggested items from an interprofessional group of 33 ED clinicians from 6 academic pediatric EDs. An initial review of 219 suggested items yielded 72 unique items. Taskforce members independently scored each item for its extent of overuse, strength of evidence, and potential for harm. The 25 highest-rated items were sent in an electronic survey to all 89 members of the American Academy of Pediatrics PEM Committee on Quality Transformation (AAP COQT) to select their top ten recommendations. The AAP COQT survey had a 63% response rate. The five most selected items were circulated to over 100 stakeholder and specialty groups (within the AAP, CW Canada, and CW USA organizations) for review, iterative feedback, and approval. The final 5 items were simultaneously published by Choosing Wisely United States and Choosing Wisely Canada on December 1, 2022. All recommendations focused on decreasing diagnostic testing related to respiratory conditions, medical clearance for psychiatric conditions, seizures, constipation, and viral respiratory tract infections. A multinational PEM taskforce developed the first Choosing Wisely recommendation list for pediatric patients in the ED setting. Future activities will include dissemination efforts and interventions to improve the quality and value of care specific to recommendations.

How Medical Students Benefit from Participating in a Longitudinal Resource Stewardship Medical Education Program (STARS): An International Descriptive Evaluation

BACKGROUND

STARS (Students and Trainees Advocating for Resource Stewardship) is a medical student leadership program that promotes integration of resource stewardship (RS) into medical education in at least seven countries. Little is known about how participation affects student leaders.

AIM

To understand how partaking in STARS impacted participants' knowledge, skills, and influenced career plans, and aspirations.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with STARS participants (n = 27) from seven countries.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

STARS was designed to facilitate grassroots efforts that embed RS principles into medical education. STARS programs globally share common features: participation from several medical schools, centralized organizing hubs and leadership summits, and support from faculty mentors. Students take lessons learnt from centralized programming to implement changes that advance RS initiatives at their schools.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

Students finished STARS with better RS knowledge, enhanced change management skills (leadership, advocacy, collaboration), and a commitment to incorporate RS into future practice. Nearly all respondents hoped to pursue leadership activities in medicine, but most were unclear if they would focus efforts to advance RS.

DISCUSSION

STARS participants gained knowledge as it relates to RS, change management skills, and catalyzed a commitment to incorporate high-value care into future practice. Medical education initiatives should be leveraged as a key strategic approach to build RS capacity.

Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Imaging with low or no benefit for the patient undermines the quality of care and amounts to vast opportunity costs. More than 3.6 billion imaging examinations are performed annually, and about 20-50% of these are of low value. This study aimed to synthesize knowledge of the costs of low-value imaging worldwide.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement. The database search was developed in Medline and further adapted to Embase-Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Primary empirical studies assessing the costs of low-value diagnostic imaging were included if published between 2012 and March 2022. Studies designed as randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive studies, cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and mixed-methods studies were eligible. The analysis was descriptive.

RESULTS

Of 5,567 records identified, 106 were included. Most of the studies included were conducted in the USA (n = 76), and a hospital or medical center was the most common setting (n = 82). Thirty-eight of the included studies calculated the costs of multiple imaging modalities; in studies with only one imaging modality included, conventional radiography was the most common (n = 32). Aggregated costs for low-value examinations amounts to billions of dollars per year globally. Initiatives to reduce low-value imaging may reduce costs by up to 95% without harming patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first systematic review of the cost of low-value imaging worldwide, documenting a high potential for cost reduction. Given the universal challenges with resource allocation, the large amount used for low-value imaging represents a vast opportunity cost and offers great potential to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Use Of High- And Low-Value Health Care Among US Adults, By Income, 2010-19

Health care payment reforms in the US have aimed to encourage the use of high-value care while discouraging the use of low-value care. However, little is known about whether the use of high- and low-value care differs by income level. Using data from the 2010-19 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we examined the use of specified types of high- and low-value care by income level. We found that high-income adults were significantly more likely than low-income adults to use nearly all types of high-value care. Findings were consistent across age categories, although differences by income level in the use of high-value care were smaller among the elderly. Our analysis of differences in the use of low-value care had mixed results. Among nonelderly adults, significant differences between those with high and low incomes were found for five of nine low-value services, and among elderly adults, significant differences by income level were found for three of twelve low-value services. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these disparities is crucial to developing effective policies and interventions to ensure equitable access to high-value care and discourage low-value services for all patients, regardless of income.

Evaluation of claims data from a commercial value-based insurance product shows pediatric imaging is not a major driver of overall or pediatric healthcare expenditures

BACKGROUND

Initiatives to reduce healthcare expenditures often focus on imaging, suggesting that imaging is a major driver of cost.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate medical expenditures and determine if imaging was a major driver in pediatric as compared to adult populations.

METHODS

We reviewed all claims data for members in a value-based contract between a commercial insurer and a healthcare system for calendar years 2021 and 2022. For both pediatric (<18 years of age) and adult populations, we analyzed average per member per year (PMPY) medical expenditures related to imaging as well as other categories of large medical expenses. Average PMPY expenditures were compared between adult and pediatric patients.

RESULTS

Children made up approximately 20% of members and 21% of member months but only 8-9% of expenditures. Imaging expenditures in pediatric members were 0.2% of the total healthcare spend and 2.9% of total pediatric expenditures. Imaging expenditures per member were seven times greater in adults than children. The rank order of imaging expenditures and imaging modalities was also different in pediatric as compared to adult members.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of claims data from a commercial value-based insurance product shows that pediatric imaging is not a major driver of overall, nor pediatric only, healthcare expenditures.

Racial Disparities in Low-Value Care in the Last Year of Life for Medicare Beneficiaries With Neurodegenerative Disease

Background and Objectives

There are racial disparities in health care services received by patients with neurodegenerative diseases, but little is known about disparities in the last year of life, specifically in high-value and low-value care utilization. This study evaluated racial disparities in the utilization of high-value and low-value care in the last year of life among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia or Parkinson disease.

Methods

This was a retrospective, population-based cohort analysis using data from North and South Carolina fee-for-service Medicare claims between 2013 and 2017. We created a decedent cohort of beneficiaries aged 50 years or older at diagnosis with dementia or Parkinson disease. Specific low-value utilization outcomes were selected from the Choosing Wisely initiative, including cancer screening, peripheral artery stenting, and feeding tube placement in the last year of life. Low-value outcomes included hospitalization, emergency department visits, neuroimaging services, and number of days receiving skilled nursing. High-value outcomes included receipt of occupational and physical therapy, hospice care, and medications indicated for dementia and/or Parkinson disease.

Results

Among 70,650 decedents, 13,753 were Black, 55,765 were White, 93.1% had dementia, and 7.7% had Parkinson disease. Adjusting for age, sex, Medicaid dual enrollment status, rural vs urban location, state (NC and SC), and comorbidities, Black decedents were more likely to receive low-value care including colorectal cancer screening (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.46 [1.32-1.61]), peripheral artery stenting (aHR 1.72 [1.43-2.08]), and feeding tube placement (aHR 2.96 [2.70-3.24]) and less likely to receive physical therapy (aHR 0.73 [0.64-0.85)], dementia medications (aHR 0.90 [0.86-0.95]), or Parkinson disease medications (aHR 0.88 [0.75-1.02]) within the last year of life. Black decedents were more likely to be hospitalized (aHR 1.28 [1.25-1.32]), more likely to be admitted to skilled nursing (aHR 1.09 [1.05-1.13]), and less likely to be admitted to hospice (aHR 0.82 [0.79-0.85]) than White decedents.

Discussion

We found racial disparities in care utilization among patients with neurodegenerative disease in the last year of life, such that Black decedents were more likely to receive specific low-value care services and less likely to receive high-value supportive care than White decedents, even after adjusting for health status and socioeconomic factors.

Using Behavioral Economics to Reduce Low-Value Care Among Older Adults: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Use of low-value care is common among older adults. It is unclear how to best engage clinicians and older patients to decrease use of low-value services.

Objective

To test whether the Committing to Choose Wisely behavioral economic intervention could engage primary care clinicians and older patients to reduce low-value care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at 8 primary care clinics of an academic health system and a private group practice between December 12, 2017, and September 4, 2019. Participants were primary care clinicians and older adult patients who had diabetes, insomnia, or anxiety or were eligible for prostate cancer screening. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to November 2023.

Intervention

Clinicians were invited to commit in writing to Choosing Wisely recommendations for older patients to avoid use of hypoglycemic medications to achieve tight glycemic control, sedative-hypnotic medications for insomnia or anxiety, and prostate-specific antigen tests to screen for prostate cancer. Committed clinicians had their photographs displayed on clinic posters and received weekly emails with alternatives to these low-value services. Educational handouts were mailed to applicable patients before scheduled visits and available at the point of care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patient-months with a low-value service across conditions (primary outcome) and separately for each condition (secondary outcomes). For patients with diabetes, or insomnia or anxiety, secondary outcomes were patient-months in which targeted medications were decreased or stopped (ie, deintensified).

Results

The study included 81 primary care clinicians and 8030 older adult patients (mean [SD] age, 75.1 [7.2] years; 4076 men [50.8%] and 3954 women [49.2%]). Across conditions, a low-value service was used in 7627 of the 37 116 control patient-months (20.5%) and 7416 of the 46 381 intervention patient-months (16.0%) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97). For each individual condition, there were no significant differences between the control and intervention periods in the odds of patient-months with a low-value service. The intervention increased the odds of deintensification of hypoglycemic medications for diabetes (adjusted odds ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.06-3.24) but not sedative-hypnotic medications for insomnia or anxiety.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial, the Committing to Choose Wisely behavioral economic intervention reduced low-value care across 3 common clinical situations and increased deintensification of hypoglycemic medications for diabetes. Use of scalable interventions that nudge patients and clinicians to achieve greater value while preserving autonomy in decision-making should be explored more broadly.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03411525.

Non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-testing among Dutch hospital clinicians: a cross-sectional analysis in data registries

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent of non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-testing among Dutch clinicians and its variation among hospitals.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using registration data from 2015 to 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged between 18 and 70 years who received a vitamin B12- or D-test.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The proportion of non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-testing among Dutch clinicians and its variation between hospitals (n=68) over 2015-2019.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2019, at least 79.0% of all vitamin B12-tests and 82.0% of vitamin D-tests lacked a clear indication. The number of vitamin B12-tests increased by 2.0% over the examined period, while the number of D-tests increased by 12.2%. The proportion of the unexplained variation in non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-tests that can be ascribed to differences between hospitals remained low. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.072 and 0.085 and 0.081 and 0.096 for non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-tests, respectively. The included casemix variables patient age, gender, socioeconomic status and hospital size only accounted for a small part of the unexplained variation in non-indicated testing. Additionally, a significant correlation was observed in non-indicated vitamin B12- and D-testing among the included hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Hospital clinicians order vitamin B12- and D-tests without a clear indication on a large scale. Only a small proportion of the unexplained variation could be attributed to differences between hospitals.

Pain, comorbidities, and clinical decision-making: conceptualization, development, and pilot testing of the Pain in Aging, Educational Assessment of Need instrument

Introduction

Pain is highly prevalent in older adults and often contextualized by multiple clinical conditions (pain comorbidities). Pain comorbidities increase with age and this makes clinical decisions more complex. To address gaps in clinical training and geriatric pain management, we established the Pain in Aging-Educational Assessment of Need (PAEAN) project to appraise the impacts of medical and mental health conditions on clinical decision-making regarding older adults with pain. We here report development and pilot testing of the PAEAN survey instrument to assess clinician perspectives.

Methods

Mixed-methods approaches were used. Scoping review methodology was applied to appraise both research literature and selected Medicare-based data. A geographically and professionally diverse interprofessional advisory panel of experts in pain research, medical education, and geriatrics was formed to advise development of the list of pain comorbidities potentially impacting healthcare professional clinical decision-making. A survey instrument was developed, and pilot tested by diverse licensed healthcare practitioners from 2 institutions. Respondents were asked to rate agreement regarding clinical decision-making impact using a 5-point Likert scale. Items were scored for percent agreement.

Results

Scoping reviews indicated that pain conditions and comorbidities are prevalent in older adults but not universally recognized. We found no research literature directly guiding pain educators in designing pain education modules that mirror older adult clinical complexity. The interprofessional advisory panel identified 26 common clinical conditions for inclusion in the pilot PAEAN instrument. Conditions fell into three main categories: "major medical", i.e., cardio-vascular-pulmonary; metabolic; and neuropsychiatric/age-related. The instrument was pilot tested by surveying clinically active healthcare providers, e.g., physicians, nurse practitioners, who all responded completely. Median survey completion time was less than 3 min.

Conclusion

This study, developing and pilot testing our "Pain in Aging-Educational Assessment of Need" (PAEAN) instrument, suggests that 1) many clinical conditions impact pain clinical decision-making, and 2) surveying healthcare practitioners about the impact of pain comorbidities on clinical decision-making for older adults is highly feasible. Given the challenges intrinsic to safe and effective clinical care of older adults with pain, and attendant risks, together with the paucity of existing relevant work, much more education and research are needed.

Comparing the Efficacy of Transforaminal and Caudal Epidural Injections of Calcitonin in Treating Degenerative Spinal Canal Stenosis: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common indication for lumbar surgery in elderly patients. Epidural injections of calcitonin are effective in managing LSS.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of transforaminal and caudal injections of calcitonin in patients with LSS.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, LSS patients were divided into two equal groups (N = 20). The first group received 50 IU (international units) of calcitonin via caudal epidural injection (CEI), and the second group received 50 IU of calcitonin via transforaminal epidural injection (TEI). The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (ODI) were used to assess the patient's pain and ability to stand, respectively. Visual Analogue Scale and ODI scores were recorded and analyzed.

Results

The results showed that caudal and TEIs of calcitonin significantly improved pain and ability to stand during follow-up compared to before intervention (P < 0.05). Additionally, CEI of calcitonin after 6 months significantly reduced pain in LSS patients compared to TEI of calcitonin (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the two epidural injection techniques in improving the patient's ability to stand (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The results of the study indicate that epidural injection of calcitonin in long-term follow-up (6 months) had a significant effect on improving pain intensity and mobility in patients with LSS, and its effect on pain in the TEI method was significantly greater than that in the CEI method.

Trends in Low-Value Care Among Children's Hospitals

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Longitudinal pediatric low-value care (LVC) trends are not well established. We used the Pediatric Health Information System LVC Calculator, which measures utilization of 30 nonevidenced-based services, to report 7-year LVC trends.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study applied the LVC Calculator to emergency department (ED) and hospital encounters from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2022. We used generalized estimating equation models accounting for hospital clustering to assess temporal changes in LVC.

RESULTS

There were 5 265 153 eligible ED encounters and 1 301 613 eligible hospitalizations. In 2022, of 21 LVC measures applicable to the ED cohort, the percentage of encounters with LVC had increased for 11 measures, decreased for 1, and remained unchanged for 9 as compared with 2016. Computed tomography for minor head injury had the largest increase (17%-23%; P < .001); bronchodilators for bronchiolitis decreased (22%-17%; P = .001). Of 26 hospitalization measures, LVC increased for 6 measures, decreased for 9, and was unchanged for 11. Inflammatory marker testing for pneumonia had the largest increase (23%-38%; P = .003); broad-spectrum antibiotic use for pneumonia had the largest decrease (60%-48%; P < .001). LVC remained unchanged or decreased for most medication and procedure measures, but remained unchanged or increased for most laboratory and imaging measures.

CONCLUSIONS

LVC improved for a minority of services between 2016 and 2022. Trends were more favorable for therapeutic (medications and procedures) than diagnostic measures (imaging and laboratory studies). These data may inform prioritization of deimplementation efforts.

Use of high- and low-value care among US adults by education levels

BACKGROUND

Healthcare reform in the United States has focused on improving the value of health care, but there are some concerns about the inequitable delivery of value-based care.

OBJECTIVE

We examine whether the receipt of high- and low-value care differs by education levels.

METHODS

We employed a repeated cross-sectional study design using data from the 2010-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Our outcomes included 8 high-value services across 3 categories and 9 low-value services across 3 categories. Our primary independent variable was education level: (i) no degree, (ii) high school diploma, and (iii) college graduate. We conducted a linear probability model while adjusting for individual-level characteristics and estimated the adjusted values of the outcomes for each education group.

RESULTS

In almost all services, the use of high-value care was greater among more educated adults than less educated adults. Compared to those with no degree, those with a college degree were significantly more likely to receive all high-value services except for HbA1c measurement, ranging from blood pressure measurement (4.5 percentage points [95% CI: 3.9-5.1]) to colorectal cancer screening (15.6 percentage points [95% CI: 13.9-17.3]). However, there were no consistent patterns of the use of low-value care by education levels.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that more educated adults were more likely to receive high-value cancer screening, high-value diagnostic and preventive testing, and high-value diabetes care than less educated adults. These findings highlight the importance of implementing tailored policies to address education-based inequities in the delivery of high-value services in the United States.

Effect of a Peer Comparison and Educational Intervention on Medical Test Conversation Quality: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Medical test overuse and resulting care cascades represent a costly, intractable problem associated with inadequate patient-clinician communication. One possible solution with potential for broader benefits is priming routine, high-quality medical test conversations.

Objective

To assess if a peer comparison and educational intervention for physicians and patients improved medical test conversations during annual visits.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized clinical trial and qualitative evaluation at an academic medical center conducted May 2021 to October 2022. Twenty primary care physicians (PCPs) were matched-pair randomized. For each physician, at least 10 patients with scheduled visits were enrolled. Data were analyzed from December 2022 to September 2023.

Interventions

In the intervention group, physicians received previsit emails that compared their low-value testing rates with those of peer PCPs and included point-of-care-accessible guidance on medical testing; patients received previsit educational materials via email and text message. Control group physicians and patients received general previsit preparation tips.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary patient outcome was the Shared Decision-Making Process survey (SDMP) score. Secondary patient outcomes included medical test knowledge and presence of test conversation. Outcomes were compared using linear regression models adjusted for patient age, gender, race and ethnicity, and education. Poststudy interviews with intervention group physicians and patients were also conducted.

Results

There were 166 intervention group patients and 148 control group patients (mean [SD] patient age, 50.2 [15.3] years; 210 [66.9%] female; 246 [78.3%] non-Hispanic White). Most patients discussed at least 1 test with their physician (95.4% for intervention group; 98.3% for control group; difference, -2.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.0 to 1.2 percentage points). There were no statistically significant differences in SDMP scores (2.11 out of 4 for intervention group; 1.97 for control group; difference, 0.14; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.54) and knowledge scores (2.74 vs 2.54 out of 4; difference, 0.19; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.43). In poststudy interviews with 3 physicians and 16 patients, some physicians said the emails helped them reexamine their testing approach while others noted competing demands. Most patients said they trusted their physicians' advice even when inconsistent with educational materials.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of a physician-facing and patient-facing peer comparison and educational intervention, there was no significant improvement in medical test conversation quality during annual visits. These results suggest that future interventions to improve conversations and reduce overuse and cascades should further address physician adoption barriers and leverage patient-clinician relationships.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04902664.

Identifying Strategies to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Testing for Low-Risk Procedures: a Qualitative Study of Facilities with High or Recently Improved Levels of Testing

BACKGROUND

Healthcare agencies and perioperative professional organizations recommend avoiding preoperative screening tests for low-risk surgical procedures. However, low-value preoperative tests are still commonly ordered even for generally healthy patients and active strategies to reduce this testing have not been adequately described.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to learn from hospitals with either high levels of testing or that had recently reduced use of low-value screening tests (aka "delta sites") about reasons for testing and active deimplementation strategies they used to effectively improve practice.

DESIGN

Qualitative study of semi-structured telephone interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

We identified facilities in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with high or recently improved burden of potentially low-value preoperative testing for carpal tunnel release and cataract surgery. We recruited perioperative clinicians to participate.

APPROACH

Questions focused on reasons to order preoperative screening tests for patients undergoing low-risk surgery and, more importantly, what strategies had been successfully used to reduce testing. A framework method was used to identify common improvement strategies and specific care delivery innovations.

KEY RESULTS

Thirty-five perioperative clinicians (e.g., hand surgeons, ophthalmologists, anesthesiologists, primary care providers, directors of preoperative clinics, nurses) from 29 VHA facilities participated. Facilities that successfully reduced the burden of low-value testing shared many improvement strategies (e.g., building consensus among stakeholders; using evidence/norm-based education and persuasion; clarifying responsibility for ordering tests) to implement different care delivery innovations (e.g., pre-screening to decide if a preop clinic evaluation is necessary; establishing a dedicated preop clinic for low-risk procedures).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a menu of common improvement strategies and specific care delivery innovations that might be helpful for institutions trying to design their own quality improvement programs to reduce low-value preoperative testing given their unique structure, resources, and constraints.

Impact of a quality programme on overindication of surgeries for endometriosis and cholecystectomies

Approximately 45% of patients receive medical services with minimal or no benefit (low-value care). In addition to the increasing costs to the health system, performing invasive procedures without an indication poses a potentially preventable risk to patient safety. This study aimed to determine whether a managed quality improvement programme could prevent cholecystectomy and surgery for endometriosis treatment with minimal or no benefit to patients.This before-and-after study was conducted at a private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, which has a main medical remuneration model of fee for service. All patients who underwent cholecystectomy or surgery for endometriosis between 1 August 2020 and 31 May 2021 were evaluated.The intervention consisted of allowing the performance of procedures that met previously defined criteria or for which the indications were validated by a board of experts.A total of 430 patients were included in this analysis. The programme prevented the unnecessary performance of 13% of cholecystectomies (p=0.0001) and 22.2% (p=0.0006) of surgeries for the treatment of endometriosis. This resulted in an estimated annual cost reduction to the health system of US$466 094.93.In a hospital with a private practice and fee-for-service medical remuneration, the definition of clear criteria for indicating surgery and the analysis of cases that did not meet these criteria by a board of reputable experts at the institution resulted in a statistically significant reduction in low-value cholecystectomies and endometriosis surgeries.

Racial differences in low value care among older adult Medicare patients in US health systems: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize racial differences in receipt of low value care (services that provide little to no benefit yet have potential for harm) among older Medicare beneficiaries overall and within health systems in the United States.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study SETTING: 100% Medicare fee-for-service administrative data (2016-18).

PARTICIPANTS

Black and White Medicare patients aged 65 or older as of 2016 and attributed to 595 health systems in the United States.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Receipt of 40 low value services among Black and White patients, with and without adjustment for patient age, sex, and previous healthcare use. Additional models included health system fixed effects to assess racial differences within health systems and separately, racial composition of the health system's population to assess the relative contributions of individual patient race and health system racial composition to low value care receipt.

RESULTS

The cohort included 9 833 304 patients (6.8% Black; 57.9% female). Of 40 low value services examined, Black patients had higher adjusted receipt of nine services and lower receipt of 20 services than White patients. Specifically, Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests, including imaging for uncomplicated headache (6.9% v 3.2%) and head computed tomography scans for dizziness (3.1% v 1.9%). White patients had higher rates of low value screening tests and treatments, including preoperative laboratory tests (10.3% v 6.5%), prostate specific antigen tests (31.0% v 25.7%), and antibiotics for upper respiratory infections (36.6% v 32.7%; all P<0.001). Secondary analyses showed that these differences persisted within given health systems and were not explained by Black and White patients receiving care from different systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests and White patients were more likely to receive low value screening tests and treatments. Differences were generally small and were largely due to differential care within health systems. These patterns suggest potential individual, interpersonal, and structural factors that researchers, policy makers, and health system leaders might investigate and address to improve care quality and equity.

Impact of low-value medications on quality of life, hospitalization and costs - A longitudinal analysis of patients living with dementia

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to analyze the impact of low-value medications (Lvm), that is, medications unlikely to benefit patients but to cause harm, on patient-centered outcomes over 24 months.

METHODS

This longitudinal analysis was based on baseline, 12 and 24 months follow-up data of 352 patients with dementia. The impact of Lvm on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), hospitalizations, and health care costs were assessed using multiple panel-specific regression models.

RESULTS

Over 24 months, 182 patients (52%) received Lvm at least once and 56 (16%) continuously. Lvm significantly increased the risk of hospitalization by 49% (odds ratio, confidence interval [CI] 95% 1.06-2.09; p = 0.022), increased health care costs by €6810 (CI 95% -707€-14,27€; p = 0.076), and reduced patients' HRQoL (b = -1.55; CI 95% -2.76 to -0.35; p = 0.011).

DISCUSSION

More than every second patient received Lvm, negatively impacting patient-reported HRQoL, hospitalizations, and costs. Innovative approaches are needed to encourage prescribers to avoid and replace Lvm in dementia care.

HIGHLIGHTS

Over 24 months, more than every second patient received low-value medications (Lvm). Lvm negatively impact physical, psychological, and financial outcomes. Appropriate measures are needed to change prescription behaviors.

Differences in use of high- and low-value health care between immigrant and US-born adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine differences in the use of high- and low-value health care between immigrant and US-born adults.

DATA SOURCE

The 2007-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

STUDY DESIGN

We split the sample into younger (ages 18-64 years) and older adults (ages 65 years and over). Our outcome measures included the use of high-value care (eight services) and low-value care (seven services). Our key independent variable was immigration status. For each outcome, we ran regressions with and without individual-level characteristics.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

N/A.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Before accounting for individual-level characteristics, the use of high- and low-value care was lower among immigrant adults than US-born adults. After accounting for individual-level characteristics, this difference decreased in both groups of younger and older adults. For high-value care, significant differences were observed in five services and the direction of the differences was mixed. The use of breast cancer screening was lower among immigrant than US-born younger and older adults (-5.7 [95% CI: -7.4 to -3.9] and -2.9 percentage points [95% CI: -5.6 to -0.2]) while the use of colorectal cancer screening was higher among immigrant than US-born younger and older adults (2.6 [95% CI: 0.5 to 4.8] and 3.6 [95% CI: 0.2 to 7.0] percentage points). For low-value care, we did not identify significant differences except for antibiotics for acute upper respiratory infection among younger adults and opioids for back pain among older adults (-3.5 [95% CI: -5.5 to -1.5] and -3.8[95% CI: -7.3 to -0.2] percentage points). Particularly, differences in socioeconomic status, health insurance, and care access between immigrant and US-born adults played a key role in accounting for differences in the use of high- and low-value health care. The use of high-value care among immigrant and US-born adults increased over time, but the use of low-value care did not decrease.

CONCLUSION

Differential use of high- and low-value care between immigrant and US-born adults may be partly attributable to differences in individual-level characteristics, especially socioeconomic status, health insurance, and access to care.

Nationwide Utilization of Computerized Dynamic Posturography in an Era of Deimplementation

Computerized dynamic posturography (CDP) provides multisensory assessment of balance. Consensus is lacking regarding CDP utility and coverage determinations vary. To inform best practices and policy, this cross-sectional study quantifies provider use of CDP among Medicare beneficiaries over time (2012-2017), by geographic region (hospital referral region [HRR]), and specialty. We observed 195,267 beneficiaries underwent 212,847 CDP tests totaling $15,780,001 in payments. Number of CDPs billed per 100,000 beneficiaries varied 534-fold across HRRs. Over 6 years, CDP use grew by 84% despite stagnant reimbursement. More utilization was attributable to primary care clinicians than specialties focused on care for dizziness and balance disorders. The observed growth and variation illustrate the potential for policy and provider preferences to drive unexpected practice patterns and underscore the need to engage a broad network of providers to develop optimal guidelines for use. CDP may offer a use case for deimplementation of low-value diagnostic services.

Potential Avoidable Costs of Low-Value Clinical Practices in Acute Injury Care in an Integrated Canadian Provincial Trauma System

This economic evaluation estimated the direct health care costs associated with 11 low-value clinical practices in acute trauma care in the integrated health care system of Quebec, Canada.

Process evaluation of the implementation of an evidence-based model of care for low back pain in Australian emergency departments

BACKGROUND

The Sydney Health Partners Emergency Department (SHaPED) trial targeted ED clinicians and evaluated a multifaceted strategy to implement a new model of care. The objective of this study was to investigate attitudes and experiences of ED clinicians as well as barriers and facilitators for implementation of the model of care.

DESIGN

A qualitative study.

METHODS

The EDs of three urban and one rural hospital in New South Wales, Australia participated in the trial between August and November 2018. A sample of clinicians was invited to participate in qualitative interviews via telephone and face-to-face. The data collected from the interviews were coded and grouped in themes using thematic analysis methods.

RESULTS

Non-opioid pain management strategies (i.e., patient education, simple analgesics, and heat wraps) were perceived to be the most helpful strategy for reducing opioid use by ED clinicians. However, time constraints and rotation of junior medical staff were seen as the main barriers for uptake of the model of care. Fear of missing a serious pathology and the clinicians' conviction of a need to provide something for the patient were seen as barriers to reducing lumbar imaging referrals. Other barriers to guideline endorsed care included patient's expectations and characteristics (e.g., older age and symptoms severity).

CONCLUSIONS

Improving knowledge of non-opioid pain management strategies was seen as a helpful strategy for reducing opioid use. However, clinicians also raised barriers related to the ED environment, clinicians' behaviour, and cultural aspects, which should be addressed in future implementation efforts.

Who's Accountable? Low-Value Care Received By Medicare Beneficiaries Outside Of Their Attributed Health Systems

Policy makers and payers increasingly hold health systems accountable for spending and quality for their attributed beneficiaries. Low-value care-medical services that offer little or no benefit and have the potential for harm in specific clinical scenarios-received outside of these systems could threaten success on both fronts. Using national Medicare data for fee-for-service beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older and attributed to 595 US health systems, we describe where and from whom they received forty low-value services during 2017-18 and identify factors associated with out-of-system receipt. Forty-three percent of low-value services received by attributed beneficiaries originated from out-of-system clinicians: 38 percent from specialists, 4 percent from primary care physicians, and 1 percent from advanced practice clinicians. Recipients of low-value care were more likely to obtain that care out of system if age 75 or older (versus ages 65-74), male (versus female), non-Hispanic White (versus other races or ethnicities), rural dwelling (versus metropolitan dwelling), more medically complex, or experiencing lower continuity of care. However, out-of-system service receipt was not associated with recipients' health systems' accountable care organization status. Health systems might improve quality and reduce spending for their attributed beneficiaries by addressing out-of-system receipt of low-value care-for example, by improving continuity.

Challenges and barriers to HIV care engagement and care cascade: viewpoint

Patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are subject to long-term management and a complex care process. Patients with HIV are clinically, socially, and emotionally vulnerable, face many challenges, and are often stigmatized. Healthcare providers should engage them with diligence in the HIV care cascade process. In this paper, we discuss from our viewpoint certain social and public health barriers and challenges that should be considered by healthcare providers to better engage patients in the HIV care cascade process and maximize its outcomes.

Reallocating Cervical Cancer Preventive Service Spending from Low- to High-Value Clinical Scenarios

Timely follow-up care after an abnormal cervical cancer screening test result is critical to the prevention and early diagnosis of cervical cancer. The current inadequate and inequitable delivery of these potentially life-saving services is attributed to several factors, including patient out-of-pocket costs. Waiving of consumer cost-sharing for follow-up testing (e.g., colposcopy and related cervical services) is likely to improve access and uptake, especially among underserved populations. One approach to defray the incremental costs of providing more generous coverage for follow-up testing is reducing expenditures on "low-value" cervical cancer screening services. To explore the potential fiscal implications of a policy that redirects cervical cancer screening resources from potentially low- to high-value clinical scenarios, we analyzed 2019 claims from the Virginia All-Payer Claims Database to quantify (i) total spending on low-value cervical cancer screening and (ii) out-of-pocket costs associated with colposcopy and related cervical services among commercially insured Virginians. In a cohort of 1,806,921 female patients (ages 48.1 ± 24.8 years), 295,193 claims for cervical cancer screening were reported, 100,567 (34.0%) of which were determined to be low-value ($4,394,361 total; $4,172,777 for payers and $221,584 out-of-pocket [$2/patient]). Claims for 52,369 colposcopy and related cervical services were reported ($40,994,016 total; $33,457,518 for payers and $7,536,498 out-of-pocket [$144/patient]). These findings suggest that reallocating savings incurred from unnecessary spending to fund more generous coverage of necessary follow-up care is a feasible approach to enhancing cervical cancer prevention equity and outcomes.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

Out-of-pocket fees are a barrier to follow-up care after an abnormal cervical cancer screening test. Among commercially insured Virginians, out-of-pocket costs for follow-up services averaged $144/patient; 34% of cervical cancer screenings were classified as low value. Reallocating low-value cervical cancer screening expenditures to enhance coverage for follow-up care can improve screening outcomes. See related Spotlight, p. 363.

A "sludge audit" for health system colorectal cancer screening services

OBJECTIVES

"Sludge," or the frictions or administrative burdens that make it difficult for people to attain what they want or need, is an unexplored health care delivery factor that may contribute to deficiencies in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We piloted a method to identify and quantify sludge in a southeastern US health system's delivery of CRC screening services.

STUDY DESIGN

Mixed methods sludge audit.

METHODS

We collected and analyzed quantitative (insurance claims, electronic health record, and administrative files) and qualitative (stakeholder interviews and process observations) data associated with CRC screening for instances of sludge. Because they contribute to sludge and reduce system capacity for high-value screening, we also evaluated low-value CRC screening processes.

RESULTS

Although specific results were likely amplified by effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the sludge audit revealed important areas for improvement. A 60.4% screening rate was observed. Approximately half of screening orders were not completed. The following categories of sludge were identified: communication, time, technology, administrative tasks, paperwork, and low-value care. For example, wait times for screening colonoscopy were substantial, duplicate orders were common, and some results were not accessible in the electronic health record. Of completed screenings, 32% were low-value and 38% were associated with low-value preoperative testing. There was evidence of a differential negative impact of sludge to vulnerable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our sludge audit method identified and quantified multiple instances of sludge in a health system's CRC screening processes. Sludge audits can help organizations to systematically evaluate and reduce sludge for more effective and equitable CRC screening.

Significant Incidental Findings in the National Lung Screening Trial

Importance

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality. Significant incidental findings (SIFs) have been widely reported in patients undergoing LDCT lung screening. However, the exact nature of these SIF findings has not been described.

Objective

To describe SIFs reported in the LDCT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial and classify SIFs as reportable or not reportable to the referring clinician (RC) using the American College of Radiology's white papers on incidental findings.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a retrospective case series study of 26 455 participants in the National Lung Screening Trial who underwent at least 1 screening examination with LDCT. The trial was conducted from 2002 to 2009, and data were collected at 33 US academic medical centers.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Significant incident findings were defined as a final diagnosis of a negative screen result with significant abnormalities that were not suspicious for lung cancer or a positive screen result with emphysema, significant cardiovascular abnormality, or significant abnormality above or below the diaphragm.

Results

Of 26 455 participants, 10 833 (41.0%) were women, the mean (SD) age was 61.4 (5.0) years, and there were 1179 (4.5%) Black, 470 (1.8%) Hispanic/Latino, and 24 123 (91.2%) White individuals. Participants were scheduled to undergo 3 screenings during the course of the trial; the present study included 75 126 LDCT screening examinations performed for 26 455 participants. A SIF was reported for 8954 (33.8%) of 26 455 participants who were screened with LDCT. Of screening tests with a SIF detected, 12 228 (89.1%) had a SIF considered reportable to the RC, with a higher proportion of reportable SIFs among those with a positive screen result for lung cancer (7632 [94.1%]) compared with those with a negative screen result (4596 [81.8%]). The most common SIFs reported included emphysema (8677 [43.0%] of 20 156 SIFs reported), coronary artery calcium (2432 [12.1%]), and masses or suspicious lesions (1493 [7.4%]). Masses included kidney (647 [3.2%]), liver (420 [2.1%]), adrenal (265 [1.3%]), and breast (161 [0.8%]) abnormalities. Classification was based on free-text comments; 2205 of 13 299 comments (16.6%) could not be classified. The hierarchical reporting of final diagnosis in NLST may have been associated with an overestimate of severe emphysema in participants with a positive screen result for lung cancer.

Conclusions and Relevance

This case series study found that SIFs were commonly reported in the LDCT arm of the National Lung Screening Trial, and most of these SIFs were considered reportable to the RC and likely to require follow-up. Future screening trials should standardize SIF reporting.

Impact of Prior Authorization on Patient Access to Cancer Care

Prior authorization (PA) is a type of utilization review that health insurers apply to control service delivery, payments, and reimbursements of health interventions. The original stated intent of PA was to ensure high-quality standards in treatment delivery while encouraging evidence-based and cost-effective therapeutic choices. However, as currently implemented in clinical practice, PA has been shown to affect the health workforce, adding administrative burden to authorize needed health interventions for patients and often requiring time-consuming peer-to-peer reviews to challenge initial denials. PA is presently required for a wide range of interventions, including supportive care medicines and other essential cancer care interventions. Patients who are denied coverage are commonly forced to receive second-choice options, including less effective or less tolerable options, or are exposed to financial toxicity because of substantial out-of-pocket expenditures, affecting patient-centric outcomes. The development of tools informed by national clinical guidelines to identify standard-of-care interventions for patients with specific cancer diagnoses and the implementation of evidence-based clinical pathways as part of quality improvement efforts of cancer centers have improved patient outcomes and may serve to establish new payment models for health insurers, thereby also reducing administrative burden and delays. The definition of a set of essential interventions and guidelines- or pathways-driven decisions could facilitate reimbursement decisions and thus reduce the need for PAs. Structural changes in how PA is applied and implemented, including a redefinition of its real need, are needed to optimize patient-centric outcomes and support high-quality care of patients with cancer.

Association Between Pharmaceutical Industry Marketing Payments to Physicians and Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid Administration to Medicare Beneficiaries

This cross-sectional study assesses the physician and financial factors associated with the use of hyaluronic acid to treat knee osteoarthritis.

High-value care for critically ill oncohematological patients: what do we know thus far?

The number of patients with cancer requiring intensive care unit admission is increasing around the world. The improvement in the pathophysiological understanding of this group of patients, as well as the increasingly better and more targeted treatment options for their underlying disease, has led to a significant increase in their survival over the past three decades. Within the organizational concepts, it is necessary to know what adds value in the care of critical oncohematological patients. Practices in medicine that do not benefit patients and possibly cause harm are called low-value practices, while high-value practices are defined as high-quality care at relatively low cost. In this article, we discuss ten domains with high-value evidence in the care of cancer patients: (1) intensive care unit admission policies; (2) intensive care unit organization; (3) etiological investigation of hypoxemia; (4) management of acute respiratory failure; (5) management of febrile neutropenia; (6) urgent chemotherapy treatment in critically ill patients; (7) patient and family experience; (8) palliative care; (9) care of intensive care unit staff; and (10) long-term impact of critical disease on the cancer population. The disclosure of such policies is expected to have the potential to change health care standards. We understand that it is a lengthy process, and initiatives such as this paper are one of the first steps in raising awareness and beginning a discussion about high-value care in various health scenarios.

Definition of low-value care in a low-risk preoperative population: A scoping review

RATIONALE

Preoperative care is one of the main areas in which to address low-value care. A detailed definition of what low-value care is in this period of the surgical care journey paves the way for new scientific research, clinical improvements, and reduction of unnecessary costs in this field.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

To identify how low-value care in low-risk preoperative population has been defined in the scientific literature and propose a low-value care framework with potential consequences in this setting.

METHODS

Scoping review of theoretical studies and peer-reviewed papers, including reviews, commentaries, or expert opinions, were considered eligible for inclusion. The following databases were consulted: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and SCOPUS (from inception to July 24, 2021), using a structured search with the keywords "low value care", "clinical waste", "preoperative", and "elective procedures." Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. The definition of low-value care in the preoperative period and their consequences were described after extracting previous low-value care concepts and summarising the contents. Also, a visual framework was built with this information.

RESULTS

From 1519 publications identified in the initial searches, 22 underwent full-text assessment, and 11 conceptual studies were included in the review. A total of four studies (36%) presented a general low-value care definition, and all studies report some situations considered low-value care in the preoperative field of low-risk surgeries. The most common example of preoperative low-value care, listed in nine studies (81%), was having asymptomatic patients undergo screening tests before surgery. The main clinical and nonclinical consequences of low-value care in the preoperative phase included false-positive results from exams as well as psychological distress, increased costs, and delay in surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisiting and integrating previous definitions of low-value care in low-risk surgery into a scoping review is a starting point for de-implementing unnecessary care and promoting improvements in surgical pathways.

Effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years on the use of high-value and low-value care

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility and enrollment on the use of high-value and low-value care services.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

The 2002-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

STUDY DESIGN

We employed a regression discontinuity design, which exploits the discontinuity in eligibility for Medicare at age 65 and compares individuals just before and after age 65. Our primary outcomes included the use of high-value care services (eight services) and low-value care services (seven services). To examine the effects of Medicare eligibility, we conducted a regression discontinuity analysis. To examine the effects of Medicare enrollment, we used the discontinuity in the probability of having Medicare coverage around the age eligibility cutoff and conducted an instrumental variable analysis.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

N/A.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of only two high-value services: cholesterol measurement [2.1 percentage points (95%: 0.4-3.7) (2.2% relative change) and 2.4 percentage points (95%: 0.4-4.4)] and receipt of the influenza vaccine [3.0 percentage points (95%: 0.3-5.6) (6.0% relative change) and 3.6 percentage points (95%: 0.4-6.8)]. Medicare eligibility and enrollment led to statistically significant increases in the use of two low-value services: antibiotics for acute upper respiratory infections [6.9 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-13.0) (24.0% relative change) and 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-15.5)] and radiographs for back pain [4.6 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-9.2) (36.8% relative change) and 6.2 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-12.3)]. However, there was no significant change in the use of other high-value and low-value care services.

CONCLUSION

Medicare eligibility and enrollment at age 65 years led to increases in the use of some high-value and low-value care services, but there were no changes in the use of the majority of other services. Policymakers should consider refining the Medicare program to enhance the value of care delivered.

A Policy Approach to Reducing Low-Value Device-Based Procedure Use

Policy Points Low-value care is common in clinical practice, leading to patient harm and wasted spending. Much of this low-value care stems from the use of medical device-based procedures. We describe here a novel academic-policymaker collaboration in which evidence-based clinical coverage for device-based procedures is implemented through prior authorization-based policies for Louisiana's Medicaid beneficiary population. This process involves eight steps: 1) identifying low-value medical device-based procedures based on clinical evidence review, 2) quantifying utilization and reimbursement, 3) reviewing clinical coverage policies to identify opportunities to align coverage with evidence, 4) using a low-value device selection index, 5) developing an evidence synthesis and policy proposal, 6) stakeholder engagement and input, 7) policy implementation, and 8) policy evaluation. This strategy holds significant potential to reduce low-value device-based care.

How Should Cost-Informed Goals of Care Decisions Be Facilitated at Life's End?

Interventions near patients' deaths in the United States are often expensive, burdensome, and inconsistent with patients' goals and preferences. For patients and their loved ones to make informed care decisions, physicians must share adequate information about prognoses, prospective benefits and harms of specific interventions, and costs. This commentary on a case discusses strategies for sharing such information and suggests that properly designed advance care planning incentives can help improve communication and decision sharing.

The Association of the First Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic with the High- and Low-Value Outpatient Care Delivered to Adults in the USA

BACKGROUND

The first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic entirely altered healthcare delivery. Whether this also altered the receipt of high- and low-value care is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To test the association between the April through June 2020 surge of COVID-19 and various high- and low-value care measures to determine how the delivery of care changed.

DESIGN

Difference in differences analysis, examining the difference in quality measures between the April through June 2020 surge quarter and the January through March 2020 quarter with the same 2 quarters' difference the year prior.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults in the MarketScan® Commercial Database and Medicare Supplemental Database.

MAIN MEASURES

Fifteen low-value and 16 high-value quality measures aggregated into 8 clinical quality composites (4 of these low-value).

KEY RESULTS

We analyzed 9,352,569 adults. Mean age was 44 years (SD, 15.03), 52% were female, and 75% were employed. Receipt of nearly every type of low-value care decreased during the surge. For example, low-value cancer screening decreased 0.86% (95% CI, -1.03 to -0.69). Use of opioid medications for back and neck pain (DiD +0.94 [95% CI, +0.82 to +1.07]) and use of opioid medications for headache (DiD +0.38 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.69]) were the only two measures to increase. Nearly all high-value care measures also decreased. For example, high-value diabetes care decreased 9.75% (95% CI, -10.79 to -8.71).

CONCLUSIONS

The first COVID-19 surge was associated with receipt of less low-value care and substantially less high-value care for most measures, with the notable exception of increases in low-value opioid use.

Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Test for Prostate Cancer Screening and Subsequent Health Care Utilization and Spending

IMPORTANCE

Delivering low-value care can lead to unnecessary follow-up services and associated costs, and such care cascades have not been well examined in common clinical scenarios.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utilization and costs of care cascades of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests for prostate cancer screening, as the routine use of which among asymptomatic men aged 70 years and older is discouraged by multiple guidelines.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study included men aged 70 years and older without preexisting prostate conditions enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan during January 2016 to December 2018 with at least 1 outpatient visit. Medical billing claims data from the deidentified OptumLabs Data Warehouse were used. Data analysis was conducted from September 2020 to August 2021.

EXPOSURES

At least 1 claim for low-value PSA tests for prostate cancer screening during the observation period.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Utilization of and spending on low-value PSA cancer screening and associated care cascades and the difference in overall health care utilization and spending among individuals receiving low-value PSA cancer screening vs those who did not, adjusting for observed characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Of 995 442 men (mean [SD] age, 78.0 [5.6] years) aged 70 years or older in a Medicare Advantage plan included in this study, 384 058 (38.6%) received a low-value PSA cancer screening. Utilization increased for each subsequent cohort from 2016 to 2018 (49 802 of 168 951 [29.4%] to 134 404 of 349 228 [38.5%] to 199 852 of 477 203 [41.9%]). Among those receiving initial low-value PSA cancer screening, 241 188 of 384 058 (62.8%) received at least 1 follow-up service. Repeated PSA testing was the most common, and 27 268 (7.1%) incurred high-cost follow-up services, such as imaging, radiation therapy, and prostatectomy. Utilization and spending associated with care cascades also increased from 2016 to 2018. For every $1 spent on a low-value PSA cancer screening, an additional $6 was spent on care cascades. Despite avoidable care cascades, individuals who received low-value PSA cancer screening were not associated with increased overall health care utilization and spending during the 1-year follow-up period compared with an unscreened population.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, low-value PSA tests for prostate cancer screening remained prevalent among Medicare Advantage plan enrollees and were associated with unnecessary expenditures due to avoidable care cascades. Innovative efforts from clinicians and policy makers, such as payment reforms, to reduce initial low-value care and avoidable care cascades are warranted to decrease harm, enhance equity, and improve health care efficiency.

Comparison of Low-Value Services Among Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries

Question

Do rates of low-value care differ between traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA), and, if so, what elements of insurance design are associated with the differences?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study of 2 470 199 Medicare beneficiaries, those enrolled in MA received 9.2% fewer low-value services than those in TM (23.1 vs 25.4 total low-value services per 100 beneficiaries). The MA beneficiaries in health maintenance organizations and those in primary care organizations reimbursed within advanced value-based payment models had the lowest rates of low-value care.

Meaning

The study results suggest that low-value care is less common in MA than TM, with elements of insurance design present in MA associated with fewer low-value services.

Importance

Low-value care in the Medicare program is prevalent, costly, potentially harmful, and persistent. Although Medicare Advantage (MA) plans can use managed care strategies not available in traditional Medicare (TM), it is not clear whether this flexibility is associated with lower rates of low-value care.

Objectives

To compare rates of low-value services between MA and TM beneficiaries and explore how elements of insurance design present in MA are associated with the delivery of low-value care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study analyzed beneficiaries enrolled in MA and TM using claims data from a large, national MA insurer and a random 5% sample of TM beneficiaries. The study period was January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2019. All analyses were conducted from July 2021 to March 2022.

Exposures

Enrollment in MA vs TM.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Low-value care was assessed using 26 claims-based measures. Regression models were used to estimate the association between MA enrollment and rates of low-value services while controlling for beneficiary characteristics. Stratified analyses explored whether network design, product design, value-based payment, or utilization management moderated differences in low-value care between MA and TM beneficiaries and among MA beneficiaries.

Results

Among a study population of 2 470 199 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [7.0] years; 1 346 777 [54.5%] female; 229 107 [9.3%] Black and 2 126 353 [86.1%] White individuals), 1 527 763 (61.8%) were enrolled in MA and 942 436 (38.2%) were enrolled in TM. Beneficiaries enrolled in MA received 9.2% (95% CI, 8.5%-9.8%) fewer low-value services in 2019 than TM beneficiaries (23.1 vs 25.4 total low-value services per 100 beneficiaries). Although MA beneficiaries enrolled in health management organization and preferred provider organization products received fewer low-value services than TM beneficiaries, the difference was largest for those enrolled in health management organization products (2.6 fewer [95% CI, 2.4-2.8] vs 2.1 fewer [95% CI, 1.9-2.3] services per 100 beneficiaries, respectively). Across primary care payment arrangements, MA beneficiaries received fewer low-value services than TM beneficiaries, with the largest difference observed for MA beneficiaries whose primary care physicians were reimbursed within 2-sided risk arrangements.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, those enrolled in MA had lower rates of low-value care than those enrolled in TM; elements of insurance design present in the MA program and absent in TM were associated with reduction in low-value care.

Prevalence and changes of low-value care at acute care hospitals: a multicentre observational study in Japan

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to examine the use and factors associated with the provision of low-value care in Japan.

DESIGN

A multicentre observational study.

SETTING

Routinely collected claims data that include all inpatient and outpatient visits in 242 large acute care hospitals (accounting for approximately 11% of all acute hospitalisations in Japan).

PARTICIPANTS

345 564 patients (median age (IQR): 62 (40-75) years; 182 938 (52.9%) women) seeking care at least once in the hospitals in the fiscal year 2019.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

We identified 33 low-value services, as defined by clinical evidence, and developed two versions of claims-based measures of low-value services with different sensitivity and specificity (broader and narrower definitions). We examined the number of low-value services, the proportion of patients receiving these services and the proportion of total healthcare spending incurred by these services in 2019. We also evaluated the 2015-2019 trends in the number of low-value services.

RESULTS

Services identified by broader low-value care definition occurred in 7.5% of patients and accounted for 0.5% of overall annual healthcare spending. Services identified by narrower low-value care definition occurred in 4.9% of patients and constituted 0.2% of overall annual healthcare spending. Overall, there was no clear trend in the prevalence of low-value services between 2015 and 2019. When focusing on each of the 17 services accounting for more than 99% of all low-value services identified (narrower definition), 6 showed decreasing trends from 2015 to 2019, while 4 showed increasing trends. Hospital size and patients' age, sex and comorbidities were associated with the probability of receiving low-value service.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of patients received low-value care in Japan. Several low-value services with high frequency, especially with increasing trends, require further investigation and policy interventions for better resource allocation.

Implications of Oncology Trial Design and Uncertainties in Efficacy-Safety Data on Health Technology Assessments

Background: Advances in cancer medicines have resulted in tangible health impacts, but the magnitude of benefits of approved cancer medicines could vary greatly. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a multidisciplinary process used to inform resource allocation through a systematic value assessment of health technology. This paper reviews the challenges in conducting HTA for cancer medicines arising from oncology trial designs and uncertainties of safety-efficacy data. Methods: Multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar) and grey literature (public health agencies and governmental reports) were searched to inform this policy narrative review. Results: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data from clinical trials and other relevant sources of evidence has made HTA for cancer medicines challenging. The approval of cancer medicines through expedited pathways has increased in recent years, in which surrogate endpoints or biomarkers for patient selection have been widely used. Using these surrogate endpoints has created uncertainties in translating surrogate measures into patient-centric clinically (survival and quality of life) and economically (cost-effectiveness and budget impact) meaningful outcomes, with potential effects on diverting scarce health resources to low-value or detrimental interventions. Potential solutions include policy harmonization between regulatory and HTA authorities, commitment to generating robust post-marketing efficacy-safety data, managing uncertainties through risk-sharing agreements, and using value frameworks. Conclusion: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data is a central problem for conducting HTA of cancer medicines, potentially resulting in misinformed resource allocation.

Clinician Attitudes and Beliefs Associated with More Aggressive Diagnostic Testing

BACKGROUND

Variation in clinicians' diagnostic test utilization is incompletely explained by demographics and likely relates to cognitive characteristics. We explored clinician factors associated with diagnostic test utilization.

METHODS

We used a self-administered survey of attitudes, cognitive characteristics, and reported likelihood of test ordering in common scenarios; frequency of lipid and liver testing in patients on statin therapy. Participants were 552 primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants from practices in 8 US states across 3 regions, from June 1, 2018 to November 26, 2019. We measured Testing Likelihood Score: the mean of 4 responses to testing frequency and self-reported testing frequency in patients on statins.

RESULTS

Respondents were 52.4% residents, 36.6% attendings, and 11.0% nurse practitioners/physician assistants; most were white (53.6%) or Asian (25.5%). Median age was 32 years; 53.1% were female. Participants reported ordering tests for a median of 20% (stress tests) to 90% (mammograms) of patients; Testing Likelihood Scores varied widely (median 54%, interquartile range 43%-69%). Higher scores were associated with geography, training type, low numeracy, high malpractice fear, high medical maximizer score, high stress from uncertainty, high concern about bad outcomes, and low acknowledgment of medical uncertainty. More frequent testing of lipids and liver tests was associated with low numeracy, high medical maximizer score, high malpractice fear, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician variation in testing was common, with more aggressive testing consistently associated with low numeracy, being a medical maximizer, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty. Efforts to reduce undue variations in testing should consider clinician cognitive drivers.

Low-value pharmaceutical care among Dutch GPs: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Low-value pharmaceutical care exists in general practice. However, the extent among Dutch GPs remains unknown.

AIM

To assess the prevalence of low-value pharmaceutical care among Dutch GPs.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective cohort study using data from patient records.

METHOD

The prevalence of three types of pharmaceutical care prescribed by GPs between 2016 and 2019 were examined: topical antibiotics for conjunctivitis, benzodiazepines for non-specific lower back pain, and chronic acid-reducing medication (ARM) prescriptions. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed to assess prescribing variation and the influence of patient characteristics on receiving a low-value prescription.

RESULTS

Large variation in prevalence as well as practice variation was observed among the types of low-value pharmaceutical GP care examined. Between 53% and 61% of patients received an inappropriate antibiotics prescription for conjunctivitis, around 3% of patients with lower back pain received an inappropriate benzodiazepine prescription, and 88% received an inappropriate chronic ARM prescription during the years examined. The odds of receiving an inappropriate antibiotic or benzodiazepine prescription increased with age (P<0.001), but decreased for chronic inappropriate ARM prescriptions (P<0.001). Sex affected only the odds of receiving a non-indicated chronic ARM, with males being at higher risk (P<0.001). The odds of receiving an inappropriate ARM increased with increasing neighbourhood socioeconomic status (P<0.05). Increasing practice size decreased the odds of inappropriate antibiotic and benzodiazepine prescriptions (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results show that the prevalence of low-value pharmaceutical GP care varies among these three clinical problems. Significant variation in inappropriate prescribing exists between different types of pharmaceutical care - and GP practices.

Quality Indicators Targeting Low-Value Clinical Practices in Trauma Care

Importance

The use of quality indicators has been shown to improve injury care processes and outcomes. However, trauma quality indicators proposed to date exclusively target the underuse of recommended practices. Initiatives such as Choosing Wisely publish lists of practices to be questioned, but few apply to trauma care, and most have not successfully been translated to quality indicators.

Objective

To develop a set of evidence and patient-informed, consensus-based quality indicators targeting reductions in low-value clinical practices in acute, in-hospital trauma care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This 2-round Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) consensus study, conducted from April 20 to June 9, 2021, comprised an online questionnaire and a virtual workshop led by 2 independent moderators. Two panels of international experts from Canada, Australia, the US, and the UK, and local stakeholders from Québec, Canada, represented key clinical expertise involved in trauma care and included 3 patient partners.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Panelists were asked to rate 50 practices on a 7-point Likert scale according to 4 quality indicator criteria: importance, supporting evidence, actionability, and measurability.

Results

Of 49 eligible experts approached, 46 (94%; 18 experts [39%] aged ≥50 years; 37 men [80%]) completed at least 1 round and 36 (73%) completed both rounds. Eleven quality indicators were selected overall, 2 more were selected by the international panel and a further 3 by the local stakeholder panel. Selected indicators targeted low-value clinical practices in the following aspects of trauma care: (1) initial diagnostic imaging (head, cervical spine, ankle, and pelvis), (2) repeated diagnostic imaging (posttransfer computed tomography [CT] and repeated head CT), (3) consultation (neurosurgical and spine), (4) surgery (penetrating neck injury), (5) blood product administration, (6) medication (antibiotic prophylaxis and late seizure prophylaxis), (7) trauma service admission (blunt abdominal trauma), (8) intensive care unit admission (mild complicated traumatic brain injury), and (9) routine blood work (minor orthopedic surgery).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this consensus study, a set of consensus-based quality indicators were developed that were informed by the best available evidence and patient priorities, targeting low-value trauma care. Selected indicators represented a trauma-specific list of practices, the use of which should be questioned. Trauma quality programs in high-income countries may use these study results as a basis to select context-specific quality indicators to measure and reduce low-value care.