Motivators of Inappropriate Ovarian Cancer Screening: A Survey of Women and Their Clinicians

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Influence of Emotions on Treatment Decisions About Low-Risk Thyroid Cancer: A Qualitative Study

Background: Little is known about the role of emotions in treatment decisions for thyroid cancer. We aimed to characterize the emotional content of patient-surgeon communication during decision-making about low-risk thyroid cancer treatment. Methods: We audio-recorded conversations about treatment for clinically low-risk thyroid cancer or biopsy suspicious for thyroid cancer between patients (n = 30) and surgeons (n = 9) in two diverse, academic hospitals in the United States. Inductive and deductive content analyses were used to characterize the emotional content in verbatim transcripts. Results: Patients' expression of emotion focused on primarily on their diagnosis and treatment outcomes. Patients commonly expressed negative emotions like fear and anxiety about "the C-word" and worried about the cancer growing or spreading. In response, most surgeons used education, as opposed to empathy or validation, to reassure patients, often highlighting low probabilities of adverse events. Surgeons emphasized the "slow-growing" nature and excellent prognosis of thyroid cancer compared with other malignancies. When discussing treatment options, surgeons often described alternatives in terms of their emotional outcomes. Some described total thyroidectomy as providing "peace of mind" or a "sense of completeness," warning that cancer or thyroid tissue remaining in the body with active surveillance or lobectomy might "worry" or "bother" patients. Surgeons supported deliberation by reassuring patients that there are "two right answers" and "no rush" to decide. Conclusions: Patients express negative emotions during treatment decision-making. In response, surgeons often miss opportunities to provide empathy in addition to education. Surgeons and patients both acknowledge patient fear and anxiety as a reason to choose thyroidectomy instead of active surveillance. Peace of mind gained by patients and surgeons as a result of thyroidectomy may lead to overtreatment of patients with low-risk thyroid cancer.

Clinician Attitudes and Beliefs About Deintensifying Head and Neck Cancer Surveillance

Importance

Surveillance imaging and visits are costly and have not been shown to improve oncologic outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). However, the benefit of surveillance visits may extend beyond recurrence detection. To better understand surveillance and potentially develop protocols to tailor current surveillance paradigms, it is important to elicit the perspectives of the clinicians who care for patients with HNC.

Objective

To characterize current surveillance practices and explore clinician attitudes and beliefs on deintensifying surveillance for patients with HNC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This qualitative study was performed from January to March 2021. Guided by an interpretive description approach, interviews were analyzed to produce a thematic description. Data analysis was performed from March to April 2021. Otolaryngologists and radiation oncologists were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling strategies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were current practice, attitudes, and beliefs about deintensifying surveillance and survivorship as well as patients' values and perspectives collected from interviews of participating physicians.

Results

Twenty-one physicians (17 [81%] men) were interviewed, including 13 otolaryngologists and 8 radiation oncologists with a median of 8 years (IQR, 5-20 years) in practice. Twelve participants (57%) stated their practice comprised more than 75% of patients with HNC. Participants expressed that there was substantial variation in the interpretation of the surveillance guidelines. Participants were open to the potential for deintensification of surveillance or incorporating symptom-based surveillance protocols but had concerns that deintensification may increase patient anxiety and shift some of the burden of recurrence monitoring to patients. Patient and physician peace of mind, the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship, and the need for adequate survivorship and management of treatment-associated toxic effects were reported to be important barriers to deintensifying surveillance.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this qualitative study, clinicians revealed a willingness to consider altering cancer surveillance but expressed a need to maintain patient and clinician peace of mind, maintain the patient-clinician relationship, and ensure adequate monitoring of treatment-associated toxic effects and other survivorship concerns. These findings may be useful in future research on the management of posttreatment surveillance.