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

Deimplementation of ineffective and harmful medical practices: a data-driven commentary

Deimplementation is the discontinuation or abandonment of medical practices that are ineffective or of unclear effectiveness, ranging from simply unhelpful to harmful. With epidemiology expanding to include more translational sciences, epidemiologists can contribute to deimplementation by defining evidence, establishing causality, and advising on study design. An estimated 10%-30% of health care practices have minimal to no benefit to patients and should be targeted for deimplementation. The steps in deimplementation are (1) identify low-value clinical practices, (2) facilitate the deimplementation process, (3) evaluate deimplementation outcomes, and (4) sustain deimplementation, each of which is a complex project. Deimplementation science involves researchers, health care and clinical stakeholders, and patient and community partners affected by the medical practice. Increasing collaboration between epidemiologists and implementation scientists is important to optimizing health care delivery.

Factors associated with patients' demand for low-value care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Low-value care is unnecessary care that contributes to inefficient use of health resources and constitutes a considerable proportion of healthcare expenditures worldwide. Factors contributing to patients' demand for low-value care have often been overlooked and are dispersed in the literature. Therefore, the current study aimed to systematically summarize factors associated with patients' demand for low-value care.

METHODS

In this scoping review, scientific articles were identified based on a search query conducted in Embase and Scopus. We identified articles using search terms related to low-value care and demand-related factors, published in peer-reviewed journals, and written in English or Dutch. The titles, abstracts, results, and conclusions were inspected to only include articles that were deemed relevant for this topic. From these articles we extracted text fragments that contained factors associated with patients' demand for low-value care. Hereafter, a thematic analysis was applied to openly, axially, and selectively code textual fragments to identify themes within the data.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles were included in this review. We identified eight core themes associated with patients' demand for low-value care: cognitive biases, emotions, preferences and expectations, knowledge-related factors, socio-cultural factors, biomedical and care-related factors, economic factors, and factors related to the interaction with the healthcare provider. Within these core themes, thirty-three subthemes were identified. For example, risk aversion and anticipated regret aversion are sub-themes of cognitive biases, while consumerism and present and future income effects are sub-themes of economic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Through this review we provide a systematic overview of factors associated with the demand for low-value care. We found that patients' demand for low-value care could relate to a multitude of factors that were clustered into eight core themes and thirty-three subthemes. To understand the demand for low-value care from the patient's perspective in greater detail, future research should focus on the interaction between and importance of these factors in different care contexts.

Tackling Pharmaceutical Pollution Along the Product Lifecycle: Roles and Responsibilities for Producers, Regulators and Prescribers

Pharmaceuticals produce considerable environmental harm. The industry's resource-intensive nature, coupled with high energy costs for manufacturing and transportation, contribute to the "upstream" harms from greenhouse gas emissions and ecosystem pollution, while factors such as overprescription, overuse, and pharmaceutical waste contribute to the "downstream" harms. Effectively addressing pharmaceutical pollution requires an understanding of the key roles and responsibilities along the product lifecycle. In this commentary, we argue that three actors-producers, regulators, and prescribers-have unique and interdependent responsibilities to address these issues. Producers and market access regulators are upstream actors who can manage and mitigate harms by both shifting manufacturing, business practices, and regulatory requirements and producing transparent, robust data on environmental harms. By contrast, prescribers are downstream actors whose capacity to reduce environmental harms arises principally as a "co-benefit" of reducing inappropriate prescribing and overuse. Potentially complicating the prescriber's role are the calls for prescribers to recommend "environmentally preferable medicines". These calls continue to increase, even with the sparsity of transparent and robust data on the impact of pharmaceuticals on the environment. Recognizing the interdependencies among actors, we argue that, rather than being ineffectual, these calls draw needed attention to the critical responsibility for upstream actors to prioritize data production, reporting standards and public transparency to facilitate future downstream efforts to tackle pharmaceutical pollution.

Reducing healthcare waste by eliminating exam table paper in a primary care practice: a sustainable quality improvement initiative

PURPOSE

Climate change is now the greatest threat to human survival. The healthcare system contributes significantly to global pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Individual practitioners play an important role in helping to reduce these impacts in day-to-day practice. Deimplementation of unnecessary processes and products, such as exam table paper, in medical offices is one simple approach to incorporating principles of planetary health into practice. All quality improvement (QI) projects must start to consider environmental impacts to fully evaluate change ideas.

METHODS

We designed a single Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle using the Institute for Health Improvement Model for Improvement. We removed the exam table paper from our primary care office and measured changes in staff time, laundry, financial costs, paper use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

RESULTS

Eliminating exam table paper in our clinic resulted in modest annual cost savings of $C718 and improved staff efficiency and motivation to introduce other green office practices. In our clinic alone, this change will save 8.2 km of exam table paper, 10 trees and 148 kg of CO2e (equivalent to driving 1233 km) every year. There were no negative consequences or feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

This simple QI project demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a small change in a primary care clinic that can improve environmental sustainability with multiple co-benefits. If all family physicians in Canada eliminated exam table paper in their offices, it would result in savings of approximately 95 940 km of paper, 121 680 trees, $C8 400 600 and 3054 T CO2 emissions, equivalent to driving around the world 360 times.

Mapping the Environmental Co-Benefits of Reducing Low-Value Care: A Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis

Reducing low-value care (LVC) and improving healthcare's climate readiness are critical factors for improving the sustainability of health systems. Care practices that have been deemed low or no-value generate carbon emissions, waste and pollution without improving patient or population health. There is nascent, but growing, research and evaluation to inform practice change focused on the environmental co-benefits of reducing LVC. The objective of this study was to develop foundational knowledge of this field through a scoping review and bibliometric analysis. We searched four databases, Medline, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL, and followed established scoping review and bibliometric analysis methodology to collect and analyze the data. A total of 145 publications met the inclusion criteria and were published between 2013 and July 2023, with over 80% published since 2020. Empirical studies comprised 21%, while commentary or opinions comprised 51% of publications. The majority focused on healthcare generally (27%), laboratory testing (14%), and medications (14%). Empirical publications covered a broad range of environmental issues with general and practice-specific 'Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions', 'waste management' and 'resource use' as most common topics. Reducing practice-specific 'GHG emissions' was the most commonly reported environmental outcome. The bibliometric analysis revealed nine international collaboration networks producing work on eight key healthcare areas. The nineteen 'top' authors were primarily from the US, Australia and Canada.

Barriers and facilitators to reducing low-value care for the management of low back pain in Iran: a qualitative multi-professional study

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent musculoskeletal disorder with a wide range of etiologies, ranging from self-limiting conditions to life-threatening diseases. Various modalities are available for the diagnosis and management of patients with LBP. However, many of these health services, known as low-value care (LVC), are unnecessary and impose undue financial costs on patients and health systems. The present study aimed to explore the perceptions of service providers regarding the facilitators and barriers to reducing LVC in the management of LBP in Iran.

METHODS

This qualitative descriptive study interviewed a total of 20 participants, including neurosurgeons, physiatrists, orthopedists, and physiotherapists, who were selected through purposive and snowball sampling strategies. The collected data were analyzed using the thematic content analysis approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine sub-themes, with 183 citations, were identified as barriers, and 31 sub-themes, with 120 citations, were defined as facilitators. Facilitators and barriers to reducing LVC for LBP, according to the interviewees, were categorized into five themes, including: (1) individual provider characteristics; (2) individual patient characteristics; (3) social context; (4) organizational context; and (5) economic and political context. The ten most commonly cited barriers included unrealistic tariffs, provider-induced demand, patient distrust, insufficient time allocation, a lack of insurance coverage, a lack of a comprehensive referral system, a lack of teamwork, cultural challenges, a lack of awareness, and defensive medicine. Barriers such as adherence to clinical guidelines, improving the referral system, improving the cultural status of patients, and facilitators such as strengthening teamwork, developing an appropriate provider-patient relationship, improving the cultural status of the public, motivating the patients, considering an individualized approach, establishing a desirable payment mechanism, and raising the medical tariffs were most repeatedly stated by participants.

CONCLUSION

This study has pointed out a great number of barriers and facilitators that shape the provision of LVC in the management of LBP in Iran. Therefore, it is essential for relevant stakeholders to consider these findings in order to de-implement LVC interventions in the process of LBP management.

Methodological progress note: De-implementation of low-value care

De-implementation is the process of reducing or stopping the use of ineffective, harmful, or low-value healthcare services that provide little or no benefit to patients. This article reviews relevant frameworks for planning and evaluating de-implementation initiatives, describes unique barriers, and provides effective strategies for de-implementation in Hospital Medicine.

Has the Use of Electrodiagnostic Studies for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Changed After the 2016 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline?

PURPOSE

A 2016 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) clinical practice guideline (CPG) de-emphasized the need for electrodiagnostic studies (EDS) for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). We tested the hypothesis that use of EDS decreased after the AAOS CPG.

METHODS

Using a national administrative claims database, we measured the proportion of patients with a diagnosis of CTS who underwent EDS within 1 year after diagnosis between 2011 and 2019. Using an interrupted time series design, we defined 2 time periods (pre-CPG and post-CPG) and compared EDS usage between the periods using segmented regression analysis. We conducted a subgroup analysis of preoperative EDS usage in patients who underwent carpal tunnel release.

RESULTS

Of 2,081,829 patients with CTS, 315,449 (15.2%) underwent EDS within 1 year after diagnosis. The segmented regression analysis showed a decrease in the level of EDS usage after publication of the AAOS CPG (-11.50 per 1,000 patients [95% CI, -1.47 to -0.95 per 1,000 patients]); however, the rate of EDS usage increased in the post-CPG period (+1.75 per 1,000 patients per quarter [95% CI, 0.97-2.54 per 1,000 patients per quarter]). Of 473,753 eligible patients who underwent carpal tunnel release, 139,186 (29.4%) underwent EDS within 6 months before surgery. After publication of the AAOS CPG, preoperative EDS usage decreased by -23.57 per 1,000 patients (95% CI, -37.72 to -9.42 per 1,000 patients). However, these decreasing trends in EDS usage predated the 2016 AAOS CPG.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall and preoperative EDS usage for CTS has been decreasing since at least 2014, predating the 2016 AAOS CPG, reflecting the rapid implementation of evidence into practice. However, EDS usage has increased in the post-CPG period, and a considerable proportion of patients who underwent carpal tunnel release still received EDS.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Given its high costs and disputed value, routine EDS usage should be considered for further deimplementation initiatives.

Reducing low-value care: what can we learn from eight de-implementation studies in the Netherlands?

Background

Reducing the overuse of care that is proven to be of low value increases the quality and safety of care. We aimed to identify lessons for reducing low-value care by looking at: (1) The effects of eight de-implementation projects. (2) The barriers and facilitators that emerged. (3) The experiences with the different components of the projects.

Methods

We performed a process evaluation of eight multicentre projects aimed at reducing low-value care. We reported the quantitative outcomes of the eight projects on the volume of low-value care and performed a qualitative analysis of the project teams’ experiences and evaluations. A total of 40 hospitals and 198 general practitioners participated.

Results

Five out of eight projects resulted in a reduction of low-value care, ranging from 11.4% to 61.3%. The remaining three projects showed no effect. Six projects monitored balancing measures and observed no negative consequences of their strategy. The most important barriers were a lack of time, an inability to reassure the patient, a desire to meet the patient’s wishes, financial considerations and a discomfort with uncertainty. The most important facilitators were support among clinicians, knowledge of the harms of low-value care and a growing consciousness that more is not always better. Repeated education and feedback for clinicians, patient information material and organisational changes were valued components of the strategy.

Conclusions

Successfully reducing low-value care is possible in spite of the powerful barriers that oppose it. The projects managed to recruit many hospitals and general practices, with five of them achieving significant results without measuring negative consequences. Based on our findings, we offer practical recommendations for successfully reducing low-value care.